K i 






^rt:ti-.i::ito;r. 



AMERICAN STATESMEN 



■DITSD BT 



JOHN T. MORSE, JR. 

VOL. XXL 

DOMESTIC POLITICS: THE TARIFF 
AND SLAVERY 

DANIEL WEBSTER 



AMS PRESS 

NEW YORK 





/^^^-^^ 



American State^m^ 



STAIJBARB LIBRAIOr EBITIQ)^ 




^A^ ,^u^m£-^ -^i^' .^2^ya/n.ce/^ /?^^4/^/ 



liOUGlITOK, MIFFI.IN K CO 



American Statesmen 



DANIEL WEBSTER 



BY 



HENRY CABOT LODGE 



tt 




BOSTON AND NEW YORK 
HOUGHTON, MIFFLIN AND COMPANY 



* \ 

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data 

Lodge, Henry Cabot, l850-192/(,. 
Daniel Webster. 

(American statesmen, v. 2l) 

Reprint of the 1899 ed. 

1. Webster, Daniel, 1782-1852. I. Series. 
E3^0.Wa.82 1972 973- 5*092/, ^B:] 71-128960 

ISBN 0-^0/^-50871-5 



Reprinted from the edition of 1899, Boston, New York 
First AMS edition published in 1972 
Manufactured in the Uhited States of America 

International Standard Book Number: 0-404-50871-5 

AMS PRESS INC, 

NEW YORK, N,Y. 10003 



CIP 



EDITOR'S PREFACE 

If Daniel Webster had had the good fortune 
to die on March 6, 1850, the story of his career 
would have been the despair of biographers. To 
tell the truth, and at the same time to avoid a 
lapse into the horrors of grandiloquence, would 
have been one of the supreme tests of literary skill. 
But Nature has an unbroken custom of inserting 
the compensation balance into her work ; and thus, 
in the case of Webster, it came about that he was 
unkindly kept alive a little too long, — whereby he 
encountered the occasion of the seventh of March, 
1850, and made upon that day a speech which is 
perhaps the most famous in our history, and also 
surely the most unfortunate. The order of subse- 
quent events shows plainly that there was no rea- 
son for this too long survival upon his part. For 
his great work had already been done ; and neither 
that speech, nor anything which he did afterward 
in the brief remainder of his life, much affected 
the course of events in the country. It was cruel 
\ that the end, which was so near at hand, should 

V iS yet have suffered this little postponement. 



N» 



yi EDITOR'S PREFACE 

I do not wish to have it inferred, from these 
words, that 1 am among those who condemn Web- 
ster for that speech. I am rather of those who 
feel tliat at his age, given his political career, 
his experience, and the lines of thought into which 
the past had inevitably impelled him, other sen- 
timents, though they might have been wished for, 
could not reasonably have been demanded. Men 
live in and for their own generations ; those old- 
sters who survive, and seek still to be active amid 
the problems of a younger generation, are to be 
judged with due regard to the point of view which 
the past has necessarily established for them. 
Their opinions may be, probably will be, set 
aside ; but to visit them with moral, or even in- 
tellectual, condemnation will often be unjust and 
inconsistent. For their opinions are given little 
weight on the very ground that they are not able 
to reason correctly amid changed moral, social, 
political, and intellectual surroundings ; and, if 
this inability exists, the consequence also follows 
that personal criticism of their characters is un- 
fair. Webster, however, has been subjected to 
precisely such criticism, with a bitterness which 
has sometimes seemed almost ferocious. Every 
new biography of him is a fresh bone of conten- 
tion. The first question asked concerning any one 
who writes or speaks of him is : What does he 



EDITOR'S PREFACE vii 

say about the seventh of March speech? As to 
all which went before that date all agree that his 
career had been marked by the ablest, most forci- 
ble, most brilliant statesmanship; yet this topic, 
in its provocation of extreme disagreement, still 
absorbs more attention than the long narrative of 
those preceding services which produce admiration 
almost too great for expression. 

Of the manner in which Mr. Lodge has treated 
the disputed episode, and how evenly he has held 
the scales between the opposing factions, readers 
are likely to judge according to those predilections 
which too many of them will probably already 
have before beginning to read the book. Mr. 
Lodge may sustain their views, or modify them 
somewhat ; but a fixed opinion about Webster is 
not easily abandoned. There is a curious obsti- 
nacy among both his friends and his detractors. 
For my own part, while willing to admit that I 
am conscious of being a little dazzled by this 
grandest of New Englanders, yet I am so inter- 
ested in the controversy that I cannot lose this 
opportunity to say that I like Mr. Lodge's views, 
and think that he has written with great fairness 
and with a very even and excellent judgment upon 
the controverted points. I have heard his volume 
attacked by admirers of Webster, because in their 
opinion it failed sufficiently to vindicate their 



viii EDITOR'S PREFACE 

hero ; and I have lieard it assailed by contemners 
of Webster, because it does not decisively say that 
his position was false to humanity, to his previous 
career, and to his genuine opinion, that it was an 
ignoble bid for the prize of the presidency. Per- 
haps this condition of conflicting opinions is tol- 
erably strong evidence of the presence of the 
judicial quality; and the writer, who disappoints 
both sides in a quarrel of such animosity, may 
justly find corroboration of his judgment in his 
failure to give satisfaction to extravagant contest- 
ants. 

JOHN T. MORSE, JR. 
September, 1898. 



CONTENTS 

CHAP. PAGE 

I. Childhood and Youth 1 

II. Law and Politics in New Hampshire . . 33 

III. The Dartmouth College Case. — Mr. Webster 

as a Lawyer 70 

IV. The Massachusetts Convention and the Ply- 

mouth Oration 107 

V. Return to Congress 125 

VI. The Tariff of 1828 and the Reply to Hayne 150 
VII. The Struggle with Jackson and the Rise of 

THE Whig Party 200 

VIII. Secretary of State. — The Ashburton Treaty 235 
IX. Return to the Senate. — The Seventh of 

March Speech 257 

X. The Last Years 324 

Index 353 



ILLUSTKATIONS 

Daniel Webster Frontispiece 

From a daguerreotype, taken April 29, 1850, by J. J. 
Hawes, Boston. 

Autograph from the Chamberlain collection, Boston 
Public Library, 

The vignette of Mr. Webster's home at Marshfield, 
Mass., is from a drawing after a photograph. 'P^gQ 

Jeremiah Mason fo-dng 78 

From the original painting by Stuart, in the possession 

of J. M. Crafts, Esq., Boston. 

Autograph from the Chamberlain collection, Boston 

Public Library. 

Webster replying to Hayne, in the Senate of the 

United States, January 20, 18o0 facing 178 

From the original, in Faneuil Hall, Boston, painted in 
Paris by George Peter Alexander Healy. 

Robert Y. Hayne facing 206 

From a daguerreotype in the possession of his grandson, 
the Hon. Robert Y. Hayne, San Francisco, Cal. 

Autograph from one on the fly-leaf of an old copy of 
Young's " Night Thoughts," owned by Mr. Hayne. 

Lord Ashburton facing 252 

From the painting by Healy, in the State Department, 
at Washington. 

Autograph from his signature to the " Ashburton 
Treaty," in the archives of the State Department at 
Washington. 



DANIEL WEBSTER 



CHAPTER I 

CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH 

No sooner was the stout Puritan Commonwealth 
of Massachusetts firmly planted than it began rap- 
idly to throw out branches in all directions. With 
every succeeding year the long, thin, sinuous line 
of settlements stretched farther and farther away 

Note. — In preparing this volume I have carefully examined 
all the literature contemporary and posthumous relating to Mr. 
Webster. I have not gone beyond the printed material, of which 
there is a vast mass, much of it of no value, but which contains 
all and more than is needed to obtain a correct understanding of 
the man and of his public and private life. No one can pretend 
to write a life of Webster without following in large measure the 
narrative of events as given in the elaborate, careful, and schol- 
arly biography which we owe to Mr. George T. Curtis. In many 
of my conclusions I have differed widely from those of Mr. Cur- 
tis, but I desire at the outset to acknowledge fully my obligations 
to him. I have sought information in all directions, and have ob- 
tained some fresh material, and, as I believe, have thrown a new 
light upon certain points, but this does not in the least diminish 
the debt which I owe to the ample biography of Mr. Curtis in re- 
gard to the details as weU as the general outline of Mr. Webster's 
public and private life. 



2 DANIEL WEBSTER 

to the northeast, friiiglno^ the wild shores of the 
Atlaiitie with lionses and farms gathered together 
at tlu* months or on the banks of the rivers, and 
with the liomes of hardy fishermen whieh clustered 
in little groups beneath the shelter of the rocky 
lieadlands. The extension of these plantations was 
chiefly along the coast, but there was also a move- 
ment up the river courses toward the west and into 
the interior. The line of northeastern settlements 
beo-an first to broaden in this way very slowly but 
still steadily from the plantations at Portsmouth 
and Dover, which were nearly coeval with the 
flourishing towns of the Bay. These settlements 
beyond the Massachusetts line all had one common 
and marked characteristic, in their constant ex- 
posure to Indian attack from the earliest days 
down even to the period of the Revolution. Long 
after the dangers of Indian raids had become little 
more than a tradition to the populous and flourish- 
ing communities of Massachusetts Bay, the towns 
and villages of Maine and New Hampshire contin- 
ued to be the outposts of a dark and bloody border- 
land. French and Indian warfare with aU its 
attendant horrors w^as the normal condition during 
the latter part of the seventeenth and the first 
quarter of the eighteenth century. Even after the 
destruction of the Jesuit missions, every war in Eu- 
rope was the signal for the appearance of French- 
men and savages in northeastern New England, 
where their course was marked by rapine and 
slaughter, and lighted by the flames of burning 



CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH 3 

villages. The people thus assailed were not slow 
in taking frequent and thorough vengeance, and so 
the conflict, with rare intermissions, went on until 
the power of France was destroyed, and the awful 
danger from the north, which had hung over the 
land for nearly a century, was finally extinguished. 
The people who waged this fierce war and man- 
aged to make headway in despite of it were en- 
gaged at the same time in a conflict with nature 
which was hardly less desperate. The soil, even 
in the most favored places, was none of the best, 
and the predominant characteristic of New Hamp- 
shire was the great rock formation which has given 
it the name of the Granite State. Slowly and 
painfully the settlers made their way back into the 
country, seizing on every fertile spot, and wring- 
ing subsistence and even a certain prosperity from 
a niggardly soil and a harsh climate. Their little 
hamlets crept onward toward the base of those 
beautiful hills which have now become one of the 
favorite playgrounds of America, but which then, 
dark with trackless forests, frowned grimly even 
in summer, and for the larger part of the year 
were sheeted with the glittering, untrampled snow 
from which they derived their name. Stern and 
stronjr with the force of an unbroken wilderness, 
they formed at all times a forbidding background 
to the sparse settlements in the valleys and on the 
seashore. 

This life of constant battle with nature and with 
the savages, this work of wresting a subsistence 



4 DANIEL WEBSTER 

from the unwilling earth while the hand was always 
armed against a subtle and cruel foe, had, of 
course, a marked effect upon the people who en- 
dured it. That, under such circumstances, men 
should have succeeded not only in gaining a liveli- 
hood, but should have attained also to a certain 
measure of prosperity, established a free govern- 
ment, founded schools and churches, and built up 
a small but vigorous and thriving commonwealth, 
is little short of marvelous. A race which could 
do this had an enduring strength of character 
which was sure to make itself felt through many 
generations, not only on their ancestral soil, but 
in every region where they wandered in search of 
a fortune denied to them at home. The people of 
New Hampshire were of the English Puritan stock. 
They were the borderers of New England, and 
were among the hardiest and boldest of their race. 
Their fierce battle for existence during nearly a 
century and a half left a deep impress upon them ; 
and although it did not add new traits to their 
character, it strengthened and developed many of 
the qualities which chiefly distinguished the Puri- 
tan Englishman. These borderers, from lack of 
opportunity, were ruder than their more favored 
brethren to the south, but they were also more 
persistent, more tenacious, and more adventurous. 
They were a vigorous, bold, unforgiving, fighting 
race, hard and stern even beyond the ordinary 
standard of Puritanism. 

Among the Puritans who settled in New Hamp- 



CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH 5 

shire about the year 1636, during the great emi- 
gration which preceded the Long Parliament, was 
one bearing the name of Thomas Webster. He 
was said to l)e of Scotch extraction, but was, if 
this be true, undoubtedly of the Lowland or Saxon 
Scotch as distinguished from the Gaels of the 
Highlands. He was, at all events, a Puritan of 
English race, and his name indicates that his pro- 
genitors were sturdy mechanics or handicraftsmen. 
This Thomas Webster had numerous descendants, 
who scattered through New Hampshire to earn a 
precarious living, found settlements, and fight In- 
dians. In Kingston, in the year 1739, was born 
one of this family named Ebenezer Webster. The 
struggle for existence was so hard for this particu- 
lar scion of the Webster stock, that he was obliged 
in boyhood to battle for a living and pick up learn- 
ing as he best might by the sole aid of a naturally 
vigorous mind. He came of age during the great 
French war, and about 1760 enlisted in the then 
famous corps known as "Rogers's Rangers." In 
the dangers and the successes of desperate frontier 
fighting, the "Rangers" had no equal; and of 
their hard and perilous experience in the wilder- 
ness, in conflict with Indians and Frenchmen, 
Ebenezer W^ebster, strong in body and daring in 
temperament, had his full share. 

When the war closed, the young soldier and 
Indian fighter had time to look about him for a 
home. As might have been expected, he clung to 
the frontier to which he was accustomed, and in 



6 DANIEL WKBSTER 

the year 17G3 settled in tlie nortliernmost part of 
the town of Salisbury. Here he built a log-house, 
to wliicli, in the following year, he brought his 
first wife, and here he began his career as a 
farmer. At that time there was nothing civilized 
l)etween him and the French settlements of Can- 
ada. The wilderness stretched away from his door 
an ocean of forest unbroken l)y any white man's 
habitation ; and in these primeval woods, although 
the war was ended and the French power over- 
thrown, there still lurked roving bands of savages, 
suggesting the constant possibilities of a midnight 
foray or a noonday ambush, with their accompani- 
ments of murder and pillage. It was a fit home, 
however, for such a man as Ebenezer Webster. 
He was a borderer in the fullest sense in a com- 
monwealth of borderers. He was, too, a splendid 
specimen of the New EngLind race; a true de- 
scendant of ancestors who had been for generations 
yeomen and pioneers. Tall, large, dark of hair 
and eyes, in the rough world in wdiich he found 
himself he had been thrown at once upon his own 
resources without a day's schooling, and compelled 
to depend on his own innate force of sense and 
character for success. He had had a full experi- 
ence of desperate fighting with Frenchmen and 
Indians, and, the war over, he had returned to his 
native town with his hard-won rank of captain. 
Then he had married, and had established his 
home ui)on the frontier, where he remained bat- 
tling against the grim desolation of the wilderness 



CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH 7 

and of the winter, and against all the obstacles of 
soil and climate, with the same hardy bravery 
with which he had faced the Indians. After ten 
years of this life, in 1774, his wife died, and within 
a twelvemonth he married again. 

Soon after this second marriage the alarm of 
war with England sonnded, and among the first 
to respond was the old ranger and Indian lighter, 
Ebenezer Webster. In the town which had grown 
up near his once solitary dwelling he raised a com- 
pany of two hundred men, and marched at their 
head, a splendid looking leader, dark, massive, 
and tall, to join the forces at Boston. We get 
occasional glimpses of this vigorous figure during 
the war. At Dorchester, Washington consulted 
him about the state of feeling in New Hampshire. 
At Bennington, we catch sight of him among the 
first who scaled the breastworks, and again coming 
out of the battle, his swarthy skin so blackened 
with dust and gimpowder that he could scarcely 
be recoo-nized. We hear of him once more at 
West Point, just after Arnold's treason, on guard 
before the general's tent, and learn that in that 
hour of doubt and suspicion Washington said to 
him, "Captain Webster, I believe I can trust 
you." That was what everybody seems to have 
felt about this strong, silent, uneducated man. 
His neighbors, like his general, trusted him. They 
gave him every office in their gift, and finally he 
was made judge of the local court. In the inter- 
vals of his toilsome and adventurous life he had 



8 DANIEL WEBSTER 

picked up a little book-learning, but the lack of 
more barred the way to the higher honors which 
would otherwise have been easily his. There were 
splendid sources of strength in this man, the out- 
come of such n race, from which his children could 
draw. lie possessed, to begin with, a })owerful 
physique and a rugged constitution, and he had 
an imposing bodily presence and appearance. He 
had courage, energy, and tenacity, all in high 
de^-ree. He was business-like, a man of few 
words, determined, and efficient. He had a great 
capacity for affection and self-sacrifice, noble aspi- 
rations, a vigorous mind, and, above all, a strong, 
pure character which invited trust. Force of will, 
force of mind, force of character ; these were the 
three predominant qualities in Ebenezer Webster. 
His life forms the necessary introduction to that 
of his celebrated son, and it is well worth study, 
because we can learn from it how much that son 
got from a father so finely endowed, and how far 
he profited by such a rich inheritance. 

By his first wife Ebenezer Webster had five 
children. By his second wife, Abigail Eastman, 
a woman of good sturdy New Hampshire stock, he 
had likewise five. Of these, the second son and 
fourth child was born on the eighteenth of Jan- 
uary, 1782, and was christened Daniel. The in- 
fant was a delicate and rather sickly little being. 
Some cheerful neighbors predicted after inspection 
that it would not live long, and the poor mother, 
overhearing them, caught the child to her bosom 



CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH 9 

and wej^t over it. She little dreamed of the iron 
constitution hidden somewhere in the small frail 
body, and still less of all the glory and sorrow to 
which her baby was destined. 

For many years, although the boy disappointed 
the village Cassandras by living, he continued 
weak and delicate. Manual labor, which began 
very early with the children of New Hampshire 
farmers, was out of the question in his case, and 
so Daniel was allowed to devote much of his time 
to play, for which he showed a decided aptitude. 
It was play of the best sort, in the woods and 
fields, where he learned to love nature and natural 
objects, to wonder at floods, to watch the habits 
of fish and birds, and to acquire a keen taste for 
field sports. His companion was an old British 
sailor, who carried the child on his back, rowed 
with him on the river, taught him the angler's art, 
and, best of all, poured into his delighted ear end- 
less stories of an adventurous life, of Admiral 
Byng and Lord George Germaine, of Minden and 
Gibraltar, of Prince Ferdinand and General Gage, 
of Bunker Hill, and fiaally of the American ar- 
mies, to which the soldier-sailor had deserted. The 
boy repaid this devoted friend by reading the 
newspapers to him; and he tells us in his auto- 
biography that he could not remember a time when 
he did not read, so early was he taught by his 
mother and sisters, in true New England fashion. 
At a very early age he began to go to school; 
sometimes in his native town, sometimes in an- 



10 DANIEL WEBSTER 

other, as the district school moved from place to 
place. The masters who taught in these schools 
knew nothing but the barest rudiments, and even 
some of those imperfectly. One of them who 
lived to a great age, enlightened perhaps by subse- 
quent events, said that Webster had great rapidity 
of acquisition and was the quickest boy in school. 
He certainly proved himself the possessor of a 
very retentive memory, for when this pedagogue 
offered a jackknife as a reward to the boy who 
should be able to recite the greatest number of 
verses from the Bible, Webster, on the following 
day, when his turn came, arose and reeled off 
verses until the master cried "enough," and handed 
him the coveted prize. Another of his instructors 
kept a small store, and from him the boy bought 
a handkerchief on which was printed the Constitu- 
tion of the United States just then adopted, and, 
as he read everything and remembered much, he 
read that famous instrument to which he was 
destined to give so much of his time and thought. 
When Mr. Webster said that he read better than 
any of his masters, he was probably right. The 
power of expression and of speech and readiness 
in reply were his greatest natural gifts, and, how- 
ever much improved by cultivation, were born in 
him. His talents were known in the neighbor- 
hood, and the passing teamsters, while they w^atered 
their horses, delighted to get "Webster's boy," 
with his delicate look and great dark eyes, to come 
out beneath the shade of the trees and read the 



CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH H 

Bible to thcni with all the force of his ehildisli 
eloquence. He describes his own existence at that 
time with perfect accuracy. " I read what I could 
get to read, went to school when I could, and 
when not at school, was a farmer's youngest boy, 
not good for mucli for want of health and strenirth, 
but expected to do somethino-." That somethino- 
consisted generally in tending the saw-mill, but 
the reading went on even there. He would set a 
log, and while it was going through would devour 
a book. There was a small circulating library in 
the village, and Webster read everything it con- 
tained, committing most of the contents of the 
precious volumes to memory, for books were so 
scarce that he believed this to be their chief 
purpose. 

In the year 1791 the brave old soldier, Ebenezer 
Webster, was made a judge of the local court, and 
thus got a salary of three or four hundred dollars 
a year. This accession of wealth turned his thoughts 
at once toward that education which he had missed, 
and he determined that he would give to his chil- 
dren what he had irretrievably lost himseK. Two 
years later he disclosed his purpose to his son, one 
hot day in the hay -field, with a manly regret for 
his own deficiencies and a touching pathos which 
the boy never forgot. The next spring his father 
took Daniel to Exeter Academy. This was the 
boy's first contact with the world, and there was 
the usual sting which invariably accompanies that 
meeting. His schoolmates laughed at his rustic 



12 DANIEL WEBSTER 

dross and niamiers, and the poor littlo farm lad 
felt it bitterly. Tlie natnral and unconscious power 
by which lie had delighted the teamsters was stifled, 
and the greatest orator of modern "times never 
could summon sufficient courage to stand up and 
recite verses before these Exeter schoolboys. In- 
telligent masters, however, perceived something 
of what was in the lad, and gave him a kindly 
encouragement. He rose rapidly in the classes, 
and at the end of nine months his father took him 
away in order to place him as a pupil with a neigh- 
boring clergyman. As they drove over, about a 
month later, to Boscawen, where Dr. Wood, the 
future preceptor, lived, Ebenezer Webster imparted 
to his son the full extent of his plan, which was to 
end in a college education. The joy at the accom- 
plishment of his dearest and most fervent wish, 
mingled with a full sense of the magnitude of the 
sacrifice and of the generosity of his father, over- 
whelmed the boy. Always affectionate and sus- 
ceptible of strong emotion, these tidings overcame 
him. He laid his head upon his father's shoulder 
and wept. 

With Dr. Wood Webster remained only six 
months. He went home on one occasion, but hay- 
ing was not to his tastes. He found it "dull and 
lonesome," and preferred rambling in the woods 
with his sister in search of berries, so that his 
indulgent father sent him back to his studies. 
With the help of Dr. Wood in Latin, and another 
tutor in Greek, he contrived to enter Dartmouth 



CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH 13 

College in August, 1797. He was, of course, 
hastily and poorly prepared. He knew something 
of Latin, very little of Greek, and next to nothing 
of mathematics, geography, or history. He had 
devoured everything in the little libraries of Salis- 
bury and Boscawen, and thus had acquired a de- 
sultory knowledge of a limited amount of English 
literature, including Addison, Pope, Watts, and 
a translation of "Don Quixote." But however 
little he knew, the gates of learning were open, 
and he had entered the precincts of her temple, 
feeling dimly but surely the first pulsations of the 
mighty intellect with which he was endowed. 

"In those boyish days," he wrote many years 
afterwards, "there were two things which I did 
dearly love, reading and playing, — passions which 
did not cease to struggle when boyhood was over, 
(have they yet altogether ?) and in regard to which 
neither cita mors nor the victoria loeta could be 
said of either." In truth they did not cease, these 
two strong passions. One was of the head, the 
other of the heart ; one typified the intellectual, 
the other the animal strength of the boy's nature; 
and the two contending forces went with him to 
the end. The childhood of Webster has an inter- 
est which is by no means usual. Great men in 
their earliest years are generally much like other 
boys, despite the efforts of their biographers to 
prove the contrary. If they are not, they are very 
apt to be little prigs like the second Pitt, full of 
"wise saws and modern instances." Webster was 



14 DANIEL WEBSTER 

neither the one nor the other. He was simple, 
natural, affectionate, and free from pertness or 
precocity. At the same time there was an innate 
power which impressed all those who approached 
him without their knowing exactly why, and there 
was abundant evidence of uncommon talents. 
Webster's boyish days are pleasant to look upon, 
but they gain a peculiar lustre from the noble 
character of his father, the deep solicitude of his 
mother, and the generous devotion and self-sacri- 
fice of both parents. There was in this something 
prophetic. Every one about the boy was laboring 
and sacrificing for him from the beginning, and 
this was not without its effect upon his character. 
A little anecdote which was current in Boston 
many years ago condenses the whole situation. 
The story may be true or false, — it is very proba- 
bly unfounded, — but it contains an essential truth 
and illustrates the character of the boy and the 
atmosphere in which he grew up. Ezekiel, the 
oldest son, and Daniel were allowed on one occa- 
sion to go to a fair in a neighboring town, and 
each was furnished with a little money from the 
slender store at home. When they returned in 
the evening, Daniel was radiant with enjoyment; 
Ezekiel rather silent. Their mother inquired as 
to their adventures, and finally asked Daniel what 
he did with his money. "Spent it," was the re- 
ply. " And what did you do with yours, Ezekiel ? " 
"Lent it to Daniel." That answer sums up the 
story of Webster's home life in childhood, of 



CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH lo 

much of the Larger life of later clays. All his 
friends were giving or lending to Daniel of their 
money, their time, their activity, their love and 
affection. This petting was partly due to Web- 
ster's delicate health as a boy, but it was also in 
great measure owing to his nature. He was one 
of those rare and fortunate beings who without 
exertion draw to themselves the devotion of other 
people, and are always surrounded by men and 
women eager to do and to suffer for them. The 
boy accepted all that was showered upon him, not 
without an obvious sense that it was his due. He 
took it in the royal spirit which is characteristic 
of such natures ; but in those childish days w hen 
laughter and tears came readily, he repaid the 
generous and sacrificing love with the warm and 
affectionate gratitude of an earnest nature and a 
naturally loving heart. He was never cold, or 
selfish, or designing. Others loved him and sac- 
rificed to him, but he loved them in return and 
appreciated their sacrifices. These conditions of 
his early days must, however, have had an effect 
upon his disposition and increased his belief in 
the fitness of having the devotion of other people 
as one of his regal rights and privileges, while, at 
the same time, it must have helped to expand his 
affections and give warmth to every generous feel- 
ing. 

The passions for reading and play went with 
him to Dartmouth, the little New Hampshire coir 
lege of which he was always so proud and so fond. 



16 DANIEL WEBSTER 

The instruction there was of good quality enough, 
but it was meagre in quantity and of limited range, 
compared to what is offered by most good high 
schools of the present day. In the reminiscences 
of his fellow students there is abundant material 
for a picture of Webster at that time. He was 
recognized by all as the foremost man in the col- 
lege, as easily first, with no second. Yet at the 
same time Mr. Webster was neither a student nor 
a scholar in the truest sense of the words. He 
read voraciously all the English literature he could 
lay his hands on, and remembered everything he 
read. He achieved familiarity with Latin and 
with Latin authors, and absorbed a great deal of 
history. He was the best general scholar in the 
college. He was not only not deficient but he 
showed excellence at recitation in every branch of 
study. He could learn anything if he tried. But 
with all this he never gained more than a smatter- 
ing of Greek and still less of mathematics, because 
those studies require, for anything more than a 
fair proficiency, a love of knowledge for its own 
sake, a zeal for learning incompatible with indo- 
lence, and a close, steady, and disinterested atten- 
tion. These were not the characteristics of Mr. 
Webster's mind. He had a marvelous power of 
rapid acquisition, but he learned nothing unless 
he liked the subject and took pleasure in it or else 
was compelled to the task. This is not the stuff 
from which the real student, with an original or 
inquiring mind, is made; but it is only fair to say 



CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH 17 

tliat this estimate, drawn from the opinions of his 
fellow students, coincided with his own, for he 
was too large-minded and too clear-headed to have 
any small vanity or conceit in judging himself. 
He said soon after he left college, and with perfect 
truth, that his scholarship was not remarkable, nor 
equal to what he was credited with. He explained 
his reputation after making this confession by say- 
ing that he read carefully, meditated on what he 
had read, and retained it so that on any subject 
he was able to tell all he knew to the best advan- 
tage, and was careful never to go beyond his 
depth. There is no better analysis of Mr. Web- 
ster's strongest qualities of mind than this, made 
by himseK in reference to his college standing. 
Rapid acquisition, quick assimilation of ideas, an 
iron memory, and a remarkable power of stating 
and displaying all he knew characterized him then 
as in later life. The extent of his knowledge and 
the range of his mind, not the depth or soundness 
of his scholarship, were the traits which his com- 
panions remembered. One of them says that they 
often felt that he had a more extended understand- 
ing than the tutors to whom he recited, and this 
was probably true. The Faculty of the college 
recognized in Webster the most remarkable man 
who had ever come among them, but they could 
not find good grounds to award him the prizes, 
which, by his standing among his fellows, ought 
by every rule to have been at his feet. He had 
all the promise of a great man, but he was not a 
fine scholar. 



18 DANIEL WEBSTER 

He was studious, puuetual, aud regular in all 
Lis habits, and so dignified that his friends would 
as soon have thought of seeing President AVhee- 
loc'k indulge in boyish disorders as of seeing him 
do so. Yet with all his dignity and seriousness 
of talk and manner, he was a thoroughly genial 
comiianion, full of humor and fun and agreeable 
conversation, lie had few intinuites, but many 
friends. He was generally liked as well as univer- 
sally admired, was a leader in the college societies, 
active and successful in sports, simple, hearty, 
unaffected, without a touch of priggishness and 
w^ith a wealth of wholesome animal spirits. 

But in these college days, besides the vague 
feeling of students and professors that they had 
among them a very remarkable man, there is a 
clear indication that the qualities which after- 
wards raised Webster to fame and power were 
already apparent, and affected the little world 
about him. All his contemporaries of that time 
speak of his eloquence. The gift of speech, the 
unequaled power of statement, which were born 
in him, just like the musical tones of his voice, 
could not be rei)ressed. There was no recurrence 
of the diffidence of Exeter. His native genius led 
him irresistibly along the inevitable path, and he 
loved to speak, to hold the attention of a listening 
audience. He practiced off-hand speaking, but 
he more commonly prepared himself by meditating 
on his subject and making notes, which, however, 
he never used aftei he had once taken the floor. 



CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH 19 

He would enter the class-room or debating society, 
and begin in a low voice and almost sleepy man- 
ner, and would tlien gradually rouse himself like 
a, lion, and pour forth his words until he had his 
hearers completely under his control, and glowino- 
with enthusiasm. 

We see, too, at this time, the first evidence of 
that other great gift of bountiful nature in his 
commanding presence. He was tall and in those 
days of youth quite thin, with high cheek bones 
and dark skin, but he was even then impressive. 
The boys about him never forgot the look of his 
deep-set eyes, or the sound of the solemn tones of 
his voice, his dignity of mien, and his absorption 
in his subject. Above all, they were conscious of 
something indefinable which conveyed a sense of 
greatness. It is not usual to dwell so much upon 
mere physical attributes and appearance, but we 
must recur to them again and again, for Mr. 
Webster's personal presence was one of the great 
elements of his success ; it was the fit companion 
and even a part of his genius, and was the cause 
of his influence, and of the wonder and admiration 
which followed him, as much almost as anything 
he ever said or did. 

To Mr. Webster's college career belong the 
first fruits of his intellect. He edited, durinjr one 
year, a small weekly journal, and thus eked out 
his slender means. Besides his strictly editorial 
labors, he printed some short pieces of his own, 
which have vanished, and he also indulged in 



20 DANIEL WEBSTER 

poetical effusions, which he was fond of sending 
to absent friends. His rhymes are without any 
especial character, neither much better nor much 
worse than most college verses, and they have no 
intrinsic value beyond showing that their author, 
whatever else he might be, was no poet. But in 
his own field something of this time, having a real 
importance, has come down to us. The fame of 
his youthful eloquence, so far beyond anything 
ever known in the college, was noised abroad, and 
in the year 1800 the citizens of Hanover, the col- 
le"-e town, asked him to deliver the Fourth of July 
oration. In this production, which was thought 
of sufficient merit to deserve printing, Mr. Web- 
ster sketched rapidly and exultingly the course of 
the Kevolution, threw in a little Federal politics, 
and eulogized the happy system of the new Consti- 
tution. Of this and his other early orations he 
always spoke w^ith a good deal of contempt, as 
examples of bad taste, which he wished to have 
buried and forgotten. Accordingly his wholesale 
admirers and supporters who have done most of 
the writing about him, and who always sneezed 
when Mr. Webster took snuff, have echoed his 
opinions about these youthful productions, and 
beyond allowing to them the value which every- 
thing Websterian has for the ardent worshiper, 
have been disposed to hurry them over as of no 
moment. Compared to the reply to Hayne or 
the Plymouth oration, the Hanover speech is, of 
course, a poor and trivial thing. Considered, as 



CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH 21 

it ought to be, by itself and in itself, it is not only 
of o-reat interest as Mr. Webster's first utterance 
on public questions, but it is something of which 
he had no cause to feel ashamed. The sentiments 
are honest, elevated, and manly, and the political 
doctrine is sound. Mr. Webster was then a boy 
of eighteen, and he therefore took his politics 
from his father and his father's friends. For 
the same reason he was imitative in style and 
mode of thought. All boys of that age, whether 
geniuses or not, are imitative, and Mr. Webster, 
who was never profoundly original in thought, was 
no exception to the rule. He used the style of 
the eighteenth century, then in its decadence, and 
very florid, inflated, and heavy it was. Yet his 
work was far better and his style simpler and more 
direct than that which was in fashion. He in- 
dulged, too, in a good deal of patriotic glorification. 
One is disposed to smile at his boyish Federalism 
describing Napoleon as ''the gasconading pilgrim 
of Egypt," and Columbia as "seated in the forum 
of nations, and the empires of the world amazed 
at the bright effulgence of her glory." These sen- 
tences are the acme of fine writing, very boyish 
and very poor ; but they are not fair examples of 
the whole, which is much plainer and more vigor- 
ous than might have been expected. Moreover, 
the thought is the really important thing. We see 
plainly that the speaker belongs to the new era 
and the new generation of national measures and 
nationally minded men. There is no colonialism 



oo DANIEL WEBSTER 

about him. He is in full sympathy with the 
Wiishingtouian i)()licy of iudepeudence in our for- 
eii^ni relations and of complete separation from tlu^ 
affairs of Europe. But the main theme and the 
moving si)irit of this oration are most important 
of all." The boy Webster preached h)ve of coun- 
try, the gi-andeur of American nationality, fidelity 
to the Constitution as the bulwark of nationality, 
and the necessity and the nobility of the union of 
the States; and that was the message which the 
man Webster delivered to his fellow men. The 
enduring work which Mr. Webster did in the 
world, and his meaning and influence in American 
history, are all summed up in the principles enun- 
ciated in that boyish speech at Hanover. The 
statement of the great principles was improved and 
developed until it towered above this first expres- 
sion as Mont Blanc does above the village nestled 
at its foot, but the essential substance never altered 
in the least. 

Two other college orations have been preserved. 
One is a eulogy on a classmate who died before 
finishing his course, the other is a discourse on 
"Opinion," delivered before the society of the 
"United Fraternity." There is nothing of espe- 
cial moment in the thought of either, and the im- 
provement in style over the Hanover speech, though 
noticeable, is not very marked. In the letters of 
that })eriod, however, amid the jokes and fun, we 
see that Mr. Webster was already following his 
natural bent, and turning his attention to politics. 



CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH 23 

He manifests the same spirit in his correspondence 
as in his oration, and shows occasionally an un- 
nsual maturity of judgment. I lis criticism of 
Hamilton's famous letter to Adams, to take the 
most strikino- instance, is both keen and sound. 

After taking his degree in due course in 1801, 
Mr. Webster returned to his native village, and 
entered the office of a lawyer next door to his 
father's house, where he began the study of the 
law in compliance with his father's wish, but with- 
out any very strong inclination of his own. Here 
he read some law and more English literature, and 
passed a good deal of time in fishing and shooting. 
Before the year was out, however, he was obliged 
to drop his legal studies and accept the post of 
schoolmaster in the little town of Fryeburg, Maine. 
This change was due to an important event in 
the Webster family which had occurred some time 
before. The affection existing between Daniel and 
his elder brother Ezekiel was peculiarly strong 
and deep. The younger and more fortunate son, 
once started in his education, and knowing the 
desire of his elder brother for the same advantages, 
longed to obtain them for him. One night in 
vacation, after Daniel had been two years at Dart- 
mouth, the brothers discussed at length the all- 
important question. The next day Daniel broached 
the matter to his father. The judge was taken by 
surprise. He was laboring already under heavy 
pecuniary burdens caused by the expenses of Dan- 
iel's education. The farm was heavily mortgaged, 



24 DANIEL WEBSTER 

and Ebeiiezer Webster knew that he was old be- 
fore his time and not destined to many more years 
of life. AVith the perfect and self-saerificing cour- 
age which he always showed, he did not shrink 
from this new demand, although Ezekiel was the 
prop and mainstay of the house, lie did not think 
for a moment of himself, yet, while he gave his 
consent, he made it conditional on that of the 
mother and daughters whom he felt he was soon to 
leave. But Mrs. Webster had the same spirit as 
her husband. She was ready to sell the farm, to 
give up everything for the boys, provided they 
would promise to care in the future for her and 
their sisters. More utter self-abnegation and more 
cheerful and devoted self-sacrifice have rarely been 
exhibited, and it was all done with a simplicity 
which commands our reverence. It was more than 
should have been asked, and a bo}' less accustomed 
tlian Daniel Webster to the devotion of others, 
even with the incentive of brotherly love, might 
have shrunk from making the request. The pro- 
mise of future support was easily made, but the 
hard pinch of immediate sacrifice had to be borne 
at once. The devoted family gave themselves up 
to the struggle to secure an education for both 
boys, instead of one, and for years they did battle 
with debt and the pressure of poverty. Ezekiel 
began his studies and entered college the vear 
Daniel graduated ; but the resources were running 
low, — so low that the law had to be abandoned 
and money earned without delay; and hence the 
schoolmastership . 



CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH 25 

At no time in his life does Mr. Webster's char- 
acter appear in a fairer or more lovable light than 
during this winter at Fryeburg. He took his own 
share in the sacrifices he had done so much to 
entail, and he carried it cheerfully. Out of school 
hours he copied endless deeds, an occupation which 
he loathed above all others, in order that he might 
give all his salary to his brother. The burden 
and heat of the day in this struggle for education 
fell chiefly on the elder brother in the years which 
followed; but here Daniel did his full part, and 
deserves the credit for it. 

He was a successful teacher. His perfect dig- 
nity, his even temper and imperturbable equanim- 
ity made his pupils like and respect him. The 
survivors, in their old age, recalled the impression 
he made upon them, and especially remembered 
the solemn tones of his voice at morning and even- 
ino- prayer, extemporaneous exercises which he 
scrupulously maintained. His letters at this time 
are like those of his college days, full of fun and 
good humor and kind feeling. He had his early 
love affairs, but was saved from matrimony by the 
liberality of his affections, which were not confined 
to a single object. He laughs pleasantly and good- 
naturedly over his fortunes with the fair sex, and 
talks a good deal about them, but his first loves 
do not seem to have been very deep or lasting. 
Wherever he went he produced an impression on 
all who saw him. In Fryeburg it was his eyes 
which people seem to have remembered best. He 



2G DANIEL WEBSTER 

was still very thin in face and figure, and he tells 
us himself that he was known in the village as 
"All-eyes; " and one of the boys, a friend of later 
years, refers to Mr. Webster's "full, steady, large, 
and searching eyes." There never was a time in 
his life when those who saw him did not afterwards 
speak of his looks, generally either of the wonder- 
ful eyes or the imposing presence. 

There was a circulating library in rr3^eburg, 
and this he read through in his usual rapacious 
and retentive fashion. Here, too, he was called 
on for a Fourth of July oration. This speech, 
which has been recently printed, dwells much on 
the Constitution and the need of adhering to it in 
its entirety. There is a distinct improvement in 
his style in the direction of simplicity, but there is 
no marked advance in thought or power of expres- 
sion over the Hanover oration. Two months after 
delivering this address he returned to Salisbury 
and resumed the study of the law in Mr. Thomp- 
son's office. He now plunged more deeply into 
law books, and began to work at his profession 
with real zeal, while at the same time he read 
much and thoroughly in the best Latin authors. 
In the months which ensued his mind expanded, 
and ambition began to rise within him. His hori- 
zon was a limited one ; the practice of his profes- 
sion, as he saw it carried on about him, was small 
and petty; but his mind could not be shackled. 
He saw the lions in the path plainly, but he also 
perceived the great opportunities which the law 



CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH 27 

was to offer in the United States, and lie prophe- 
sied that we, too, slionld soon have onr Mansfields 
and Kenyons. The hand of poverty was heavy 
u})on him, and he was chafini^ and beatini^ his 
wings against tlie iron l)ars with whieh eircuni- 
stances had imprisoned him. He longed for a 
wider field, and eagerly desired to finish his stnd- 
jes in Boston, but saw no way to get there, exeept 
by a "miracle." 

This miracle came through Ezekiel, who had 
been doing more for himself and his family than 
any one else, but who, after three years in college, 
was at the end of his resources, and had taken, in 
his turn, to keeping school. Daniel went to Bos- 
ton, and there obtained a good private school for 
his brother. The salary thus earned by Ezekiel 
was not only sufficient for himself, but enabled 
Daniel to gratify the cherished wish of his heart, 
and come to the New England capital to conclude 
his professional studies. 

The first thing to be done was to gain admit- 
tance to some good office. Mr. Webster was lucky 
enough to obtain an introduction to Mr. Gore, 
with whom, as with the rest of the world, that 
wonderful look and manner, apparent even then, 
through boyishness and rusticity, stood him in 
good stead. Mr. Gore questioned him, trusted 
him, and told him to hang up his hat, begin work 
as clerk at once, and write to New Hampshire for 
his credentials. The position thus obtained was 
one of fortune's best gifts to Mr. Webster. It 



28 DANIEL WEBSTER 

not only <,^ave him an opportunity for a wide study 
of the hiw under wise supervision, but it brought 
liim into daily contact with a trained barrister and 
an experienced public man. Christopher Gore, 
one of the most eminent members of the Boston 
bar and a distinguished statesman, had just re- 
turned from England, whither he had been sent 
us one of the commissioners appointed under the 
Jay treaty. He was a fine type of the aristocratic 
Federalist leader, one of the most prominent of 
that little group which from the "headquarters of 
good principles " in Boston so long controlled the 
politics of Massachusetts. He was a scholar, gen- 
tleman, and man of the world, and his portrait 
shows us a refined, high-bred face, suggesting a 
French marcpiis of the eighteenth century rather 
than the son of a New England sea-captain. A 
few years later, iVIr. Gore was chosen governor of 
Massachusetts, and defeated when a candidate for 
reelection, largely, it is supposed, because he rode 
in a coach and four (to which rumor added out- 
riders) whenever he went to his estate at Wal- 
tham. This mode of travel offended the sensibili- 
ties of his democratic constituents, but did not 
prevent his being subsecpiently chosen to the Sen- 
ate of the United States, where he served a term 
with much distinction. The society of such a 
man was invaluable to iVIr. Webster at this time. 
It taught him many things which he could have 
learned in no other way, and appealed to that 
stronjr taste for evervthiu"; dignified and refined 



CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH 29 

which was so iiuirked a trait of his disposition and 
habits. lie saw now the real possibilities which 
he had dreamed of in his native village; and while 
he studied law deeply and helped his brother with 
his school, he also studied men still more thoroughly 
and curiously. The professional associates and 
friends of Mr. Gore were the leaders of the Boston 
bar when it had many distinguished men whose 
names hold high places in the history of American 
law. Among them were Theophilus Parsons, chief 
justice of Massachusetts ; Samuel Dexter, the ablest 
of them all, fresh from service in Congress and the 
Senate and as secretary of the treasury ; Harrison 
Gray Otis, fluent and graceful as an orator ; James 
Sullivan, afterwards governor, and Daniel Davis, 
the solicitor-general. All these and many more 
Mr. Webster saw and watched, and he has left in 
his diary discriminating sketches of Parsons and 
Dexter, whom he greatly admired, and of Sullivan, 
of whom he had a poor opinion professionally. 

Towards the end of the year 1804, while Mr. 
Webster was thus pleasantly engaged in studying 
his profession, getting a glimpse of the world, and 
now and then earning a little money, an opening 
came to him which seemed to promise immediate 
and assured prosperity. The judges of his father's 
court of common pleas offered him the vacant clerk- 
ship, worth about fifteen hundred dollars annually. 
This was wealth to Mr. Webster. With this in- 
come he could relieve the family from debt, make 
his father's last years comfortable, and smooth 



30 DANIEL WEBSTER 

Ezekiel's path to the bar. When, however, he 
aiinouiK'ed lils good luck to Mr. Gore, and his 
intention of innnediately going home to accept the 
position, that gentleman, to Mr. Webster's great 
surprise, strongly urged a contrary course. He 
pointed out the possible reduction of the salary, 
the fact that the office depended on the favor of 
the judges, and, above all, that it led to nothing, 
and destroyed the chances of any really great ca- 
reer. Thiswise mentor said: "Go on and finish 
your studies. You are poor enough, but there 
are greater evils than poverty; live on no man's 
favor ; what bread you do eat, let it be the bread 
of independence; pursue your profession, make 
yourself useful to your friends and a little for- 
niida))le to your enemies, and you have nothing to 
fear." Mr. Webster, always susceptible to outside 
influences, saw the wisdom of this advice, and 
accepted it. It would have been well if he had 
never swerved even by a hair's breadth from the 
high and sound principles which it inculcated; but 
he acted then at least without delay. Going at 
once to Salisbury, he broke the news of his un- 
looked-for determination to his father, who was 
utterly amazed. Pride in his son's high spirit 
mingled somewhat with disappointment at the pro- 
spect of continued hardships; but the brave old 
man accepted the decision with the Puritan stoicism 
which was so marked a trait in his character, and 
the matter ended there. 

Returning to Boston, Mr. Webster was admit- 



CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH 31 

ted to the bar in March, 1805. Mr. Gore moved 
his admission, and, in the customary speech, pro- 
phesied his student's future eminence with a sure 
knowledge of the hitent powers which had dictated 
his own advice in the matter of the clerkship. 
Soon after this, Mr. Webster returned to New 
Hampshire and opened his office in the little town 
of Boscawen, in order tliat he might be near his 
father. Here he devoted himself assiduously to 
business and study for more than two years, work- 
ing at his profession, and occasionally writing 
articles for the "Boston Anthology." During this 
time he made his first appearance in court, his 
father being on the bench. He gathered together 
a practice worth five or six hundred dollars a year, 
a very creditable sum for a young country prac- 
titioner, and won a reputation which made him 
known in the State. 

In April, 1806, after a noble, toiling, unselfish 
life of sixty-seven years, Ebenezer Webster died. 
Daniel assumed his father's debts, waited until 
Ezekiel was admitted to the bar, and then, trans- 
ferring his business to his brother, moved, in the 
autumn of 1807, to Portsmouth. This was the 
principal town of the State, and offered, therefore, 
the larger field which he felt he needed to give his 
talents sufficient scope. Thus the first period in 
his life closed, and he started out on the extended 
and distinguished career which lay before him. 
These early years had been years of hardship, but 
they were among the best of his life. Through 



32 DANIEL WEBSTER 

L^rcat difficulties and by the self-sacrifice of his 
family, he had made his way to the tlireshold of 
tlie career for which he was so richly endowed. 
Ih' ]iad passed an unblemished youth; lie had led 
a clean, honest, hard-working* life; he was simple, 
manly, affectionate. Poverty had been a misfor- 
tune, not because it had warped or soured him, 
for he smiled at it with cheerful i)hilosophy, nor 
because it had made him avaricious, for he never 
either then or at any time cared for money for its 
own sake, and nothing could chill the natural lav- 
ishness of his disposition. But poverty accustomed 
him to borrowing and to debt, and this w^as a 
misfortune to a man of Mr. Webster's tempera- 
ment. In those early days he was anxious to pay 
his debts; but they did not lie heavy upon him or 
carry a proper sense of responsibility, as they did 
to p]zekiel and to his father. He was deeply in 
debt; his books, even, were bought with borrowed 
money, all which was natural and inevitable; but 
the trouble was that it never seems to have weighed 
upon him or been felt by him as of much impor- 
tance, lie was thus early brought into the habit 
of debt, and was led unconsciously to regard debts 
and borrowing as he did the sacrifices of others, 
as the normal modes of existence. Such a condi- 
tion was to be deplored, because it fostered an 
unfortunate tendency in his moral nature. With 
this exception, Mr. Webster's early years present 
a bright picture, and one which any man had 3- 
right to regard with pride and affection. 



CHAPTER II 

LAW AND rOLITICS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE 

The occasion of Mr. Webster's first appearance 
in court has been tbe subject of varying tradition. 
It is certain, however, that in the counties where 
he practiced during his residence at Boscawen, he 
made an unusual and very profound impression. 
The effect then produced is described in homely 
phrase by one who knew him well. The reference 
is to a murder trial, in which Mr. Webster gained 
his first celebrity. 

" There was a man tried for his life, and the judges 
chose Webster to plead for him ; and, from what I can 
learn, he never has spoken better than he did there 
where he first began. He was a black, raven-haired 
fellow, with an eye as black as Death's, and as heavy as 
a lion's, — that same heavy look, not sleepy, but as if 
he did n't care about anything that was going on about 
him or anything anywhere else. He didn't look as if 
he was thinking about anything, but as if he ivould think 
like a hurricane if he once got waked up to it. They 
say the lion looks so when he is quiet. . . . Webster 
would sometimes be engaged to argue a case just as it 
was coming to trial. That would set him to thinking. 
It would n't wrinkle his forehead, but made him rest- 



34 DANIEL WEBSTER 

less. He would shift liis feet about, ami run liis hand 
up over his forehead, through his Indian-bhick liair, and 
lift his ui)])er lip and show his teeth, which were as 
wliitc as a hound's." 

Of course the speech so admired then was infi- 
nitely below what was done afterwards. The very 
next was probably better, for Mr. Webster grew 
steadily. This observer, however, tells us not 
what Mr. Webster said, but how he looked. It 
was the personal presence which dwelt with every 
one at this time. 

Thus with his wonderful leonine look and large, 
dark eyes, and with the growing fame which he 
had won, Mr. Webster betook himself to Ports- 
mouth. He had met some of the leading lawyers 
already, but now he was to be brought into direct 
and almost daily competition with them. At that 
period in New England there was a great rush of 
men of talent to the bar, then casting ol¥ its colo- 
nial fetters and emerging to an independent life. 
The pulpit had ceased to attract, as of old ; medi- 
cine was in its infancy; there were none of the 
other manifold pursuits of to-day, and politics did 
not offer a career apart. Outside of mercantile 
affairs, therefore, the intellectual forces of the old 
Puritan connnon wealths, overflowing with life, and 
feeling the thrill of youthful independence and the 
confidence of rapid growth in business, wealth, and 
population, were concentrated in the law. Even 
in a small State like New Hampshire, presenting 
very limited opportunities, there was, relatively 



LAW AND POLITICS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE 35 

speaking, an extraordinary amount of aMlit}^ among 
the members of the bar, notwithstanding the fact 
tliat they had but just escaped from the condition 
of colonists. Conunon sense was the divinity of 
both the courts and the profession. The learning 
was neither extensive nor profound, but practical 
knowledge, sound ])rinciples, and shrewd manage- 
ment were conspicuous. Jeremiah Smith, the 
chief justice, a man of humor and cultivation, 
was a well read and able judge ; George Sullivan 
was ready of speech and fertile in expedients ; and 
Parsons and Dexter of Massachusetts, both men 
of national reputation, appeared from time to time 
in the New Hampshire courts. Among the most 
eminent was William Plumer, then senator and 
afterwards governor of the State, a well-trained, 
clear-headed, judicious man. He was one of Mr. 
Webster's early antagonists, and defeated him in 
their first encounter. Yet at the same time, al- 
though a leader of the bar and a United States 
senator, he seems to have been oppressed with a 
sense of responsibility and even of inequality by 
this thin, black-eyed young lawj^er from the back 
country. Mr. Plumer was a man of cool and ex- 
cellent judgment, and he thought that Mr. Web- 
ster on this occasion was too excursive and declama- 
tory. He also deemed him better fitted by mind 
and temperament for politics than for the law, an 
opinion fully justified in the future, despite Mr. 
Webster's eminence at the bar. In another case, 
where they were opposed, Mr. Plumer quoted a 



36 DANIEL WEBSTER 

passage from Peake's "Law of Evidence." Mr. 
Webster criticised the citation as bad law, pro- 
nounced the book a miserable two-penny compila- 
tion, and then, throwing it down with a fine dis- 
dain, said, "So much for Mr. Thomas Peake's 
compendium of the 'Law of Evidence.'" Such 
was his manner that every one present appeared to 
think the point settled, and felt rather ashamed of 
ever having heard of Mr. Peake or his unfortunate 
book. Thereupon Mr. Plumer produced a volume 
of reports by which it appeared that the despised 
passage was taken word for word from one of Lord 
Mansfield's decisions. The wretched Peake's char- 
acter was rehabilitated, and Mr. Webster silenced. 
This was an illustration of a failing of Mr. Web- 
ster at that time. He was rough and unceremo- 
nious, and even overbearing, both to court and 
bar, the natural result of a new sense of power in 
an inexperienced man. This harshness of manner, 
however, soon disappeared. He learned rapidly 
to practice the stately and solemn courtesy which 
distinguished him through life. 

There was one lawyer, however, at the head of 
his profession in New Hampshire, who had more 
effect upon Mr. Webster than any other whom he 
ever met there or elsewhere. This was the man 
to whom the Shaker said: "By thy size and thy 
language^ I judge that thou art Jeremiah Mason." 

^ Mr. Mason, as is ■well known, was six feet seven inches in 
height, and his language, always very forcible and direct, was, 
when he was irritated, if we may trust tradition, at times some- 
what profane. 



LAW AND POLITICS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE 37 

Mr. Mason was one of the greatest common-law- 
yers this country has ever produced. Keen and 
penetrating in intellect, he was master of a relent- 
less logic and of a style which, though simple and 
homely, was clear and correct to the last point. 
Slow and deliberate in his movements, and senten- 
tious in his utterances, he dealt so powerfully with 
evidence and so lucidly with principles of law that 
he rarely failed to carry conviction to his hearers. 
He was particularly renowned for his success in 
getting verdicts.' Many years afterwards Mr. 
Webster gave it as his deliberate opinion that he 
had never met with a stronger intellect, a mind of 
more native resources or quicker and deeper vision 
than were possessed by Mr. Mason, whom in men- 
tal reach and grasp and in closeness of reasoning 
he would not allow to be second even to Chief 
Justice Marshall. Mr. Mason, on his side, with 
his usual sagacity, at once detected the great tal- 
ents of Mr. Webster. In the first case where they 
were opposed, a murder trial, Mr. Webster took 
the place of the attorney -general for the prosecu- 
tion. Mr. Mason, speaking of the impression 
made by his youthful and then unknown opponent, 
said : — 

" He broke upon me like a thunder shower in July, 
sudden, portentous, sweeping all before it. It was the 
first case in which he appeared at our bar ; a criminal 
prosecution in which I had arranged a very pretty de- 
fense, as against the attorney-general, Atkinson, who 
was able enough in his way, but whom I knew very well 



38 DANIEL WEBSTER 

how to take. Atkinson being al).sent, Webster con- 
ducted the case for him, and turned, in the most mas- 
terly manner, the line of my defenses, carrying with him 
all but one of the jurors, so that I barely saved my client 
by my best exertions. I was never more surprised than 
by this remarkable exhibition of unexpected i)ower. It 
surpassed, in some resi)ects, anything which I have ever 
since seen even in him." 

With all his admiration for his young antago- 
nist, however, one cannot help noticing that the 
generous and modest but astute counsel for the 
defense ended by getting a disagreement which 
was equivalent to winning his case. 

Fortune showered many favors upon Mr. Web- 
ster, but none more valuable than that of having 
Jeremiah Mason as liis chief opponent at the New 
Hampshire bar. Mr. Mason had no spark of 
envy in his composition. He not only regarded 
with pleasure the great abilities of Mr. Webster, 
but lie watched with kindly interest the rapid rise 
which soon made this stranger from the country 
his principal competitor and the champion com- 
monly chosen to meet him in the courts. He gave 
Mr. Webster his friendship, stanch, and unvary- 
ing, until his death; he gave freely also of his 
wisdom and experience in advice and counsel. 
Best of all was the opportunity for instruction and 
discipline which Mr. Webster gained by repeated 
contests with such a man. The strong qualities 
of Mr. Webster's mind rapidly developed by con- 
stant i)ractice and under such influences. He 



LAW AND POLITICS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE 30 

sliowed more and more in every case his wonderful 
instinct for seizing on the very heart of a question, 
and for extricating the essential points from the 
midst of confused details and clashing- arfruments. 
He displayed, too, more strongly every day his 
capacity for close, logical reasoning and for telling 
retort, backed by a passion and energy none the 
less effective from being but slowly called into 
activity. In a word, the unequaled power of 
stating facts or principles, which was the predomi- 
nant quality of Mr. Webster's genius, grew stead- 
ily with a vigorous vitality, while his eloquence 
developed in a similar striking fashion. Much of 
this growth and improvement was due to the sharp 
competition and bright example of Mr. Mason. 
But the best lesson that Mr. Webster learned 
from his wary yet daring antagonist was in regard 
to style. When he saw Mr. Mason go close to 
the jury box, and in a plain style and conversa- 
tional manner, force conviction upon his hearers, 
and carry off verdict after verdict, Mr. Webster 
felt as he had never done before the defects of his 
own modes of expression. His florid phrases 
looked rather mean, insincere, and tasteless, be- 
sides being weak and ineffective. From that time 
he began to study simplicity and directness, which 
ended in the perfection of a style unsurpassed in 
modern oratory. The years of Mr. Webster's 
professional life in Portsmouth under the tuition 
of Mr. Mason were of inestimable service to him. 
Early in this period, also, Mr. Webster gave 



40 DANIEL WEBSTER 

up liis bachelor existence, and made for himself a 
home. When he first appeared at church in Ports- 
mouth the minister's daughter noted and remem- 
bered his striking features and look, and regarded 
him as one with great capacities for good or evil. 
But the interesting stranger was not destined to 
fall a victim to any of the young ladies of Ports- 
mouth. In the spring of 1808 he slipped away 
from his new friends and returned to Salisbury, 
where, in May, he was married. The bride he 
broudit back to Portsmouth was Grace Fletcher, 
daughter of the minister of Hopkinton. Mr. 
Webster is said to have seen her first at church 
in Salisbury, whither she came on horseback in a 
tight-fitting black velvet dress, and looking, as he 
said, "like an angel." She was certainly a very 
lovely and charming woman, of delicate and refined 
sensibilities and bright and sympathetic mind. She 
was a devoted wife, the object of her husband's 
first and strongest love, and the mother of his chil- 
dren. It is very pleasant to look at Mr. Webster 
in his home during these early years of his married 
life. It was a happy, innocent, untroubled time. 
He was advancing in his profession, winning fame 
and respect, earning a sufficient income, blessed in 
his domestic relations, and with his children grow- 
ing up about him. He was social by nature, and 
very popular everywhere. Genial and affectionate 
in disposition, he attached everybody to him, and 
his hearty humor, love of mimicry, and fund of 
anecdote made him a delightful companion, and led 



LAW AND POLITICS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE 41 

Mr. Mason to say that the stage had lost a great 
actor in Webster. 

But while he was thus enjoying professional suc- 
cess and the contented happiness of his fireside, he 
was slowly but surely drifting into the current of 
politics, whither his genius led him, and which 
had for him an irresistible attraction. Mr. Web- 
ster took both his politics and his religion from 
his father, and does not appear to have questioned 
either. He had a peculiarly conservative cast 
of mind. In an age of revolution and skepticism 
he showed no trace of the questioning spirit which 
then prevailed. Even in his earliest years he 
was a firm believer in existing institutions, in what 
was fixed and established. He had a little of the 
disposition of Lord Thurlow, who, when asked by 
a dissenter w^hy, being a notorious free-thinker, he 
so ardently supported the Established Church, re- 
l)lied : " I support the Church of England because 
it is established. Establish your religion, and 
I '11 support that." But if Mr. Webster took his 
religion and politics from his father in an unques- 
tioning spirit, he accepted them in a mild form. 
He was a liberal Federalist because he had a wide 
mental vision, and by nature took broad views of 
everything. His father, on the other hand, was 
a rigid, intolerant Federalist of a thorough-going 
Puritan type. Being taken ill once in a town of 
Democratic proclivities, he begged to be carried 
home. "I was born a Federalist," he said, "I 
have lived a Federalist, and I won't die in a 



42 DANIEL WEBSTER 

Democratic town." In the same way Ezekiel 
AVebster's un^ upromising Federalism shut him 
out from political preferment, and he would never 
modify his principles one jot in order to gain the 
seat in Congress which he might easily have ob- 
tained by slight concessions. The broad and lib- 
eral spirit of Daniel Webster rose superior to the 
rigid and even narrow opinions of his father and 
brother, but perhaps it would have been better for 
him if he had had in addition to his splendid mind 
the stern, unbending force of character which made 
his father and brother stand by their principles 
with innnovable Puritan determination. Liberal 
as he was, however, in his political opinions, the 
same conservative spirit which led him to adopt 
his creed made him sustain it faithfully and con- 
stantly when he had once accejDted it. He was a 
steady and trusted party man, although neither 
then nor at any time a blind, unreasoning partisan. 
]Mr. Webster came forward gradually as a po- 
litical leader by occasional addresses and speeches, 
at first with long intervals between them, and then 
becoming more frequent, until at last he found 
himself fairly engaged in a public career. In 
1804, at the request of some of his father's friends, 
he published a pamjMet, entitled, "An Appeal to 
Old Whigs," in the interest of Gilman, the Fed- 
eral candidate for governor. He seems to have 
had a very poor opinion of this performance, and 
his interest in the success of the party at tliat junc- 
ture was very slight. In 1805 he delivered a 



LAW AND POLITICS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE 43 

Foiirtli of July oration at Salis])niT, wliioh lias 
not been preserved ; and in the following year lie 
gave another before the ''Federal gentlemen" of 
Concord, which was published. The tone of this 
si)eech is not very partisan, nor does it exhibit 
the bitter spirit of tlie Federalists, although he 
attacked the administration, was violent in uraiiHr 
tlie protection of commerce, and was extremely 
savage in his remarks about France. At times 
the style is forcible, and even rich, but, as a rule, 
it is still strained and artificial. The oration be- 
gins eagerly with an appeal for the Constitution 
and the Kepublic, the ideas always uppermost in 
Mr. Webster's mind. As a whole, it shows a 
distinct improvement in form, but there are no 
marks of genius to raise it above the ordinary level 
of Fourth of July speeches. His next production 
was a little pamphlet, published in 1808, on the 
eml)argo, which was then paralyzing New England, 
and crushing out her prosperity. This essay is 
important because it is the first clear instance of 
the remarkable faculty which Mr. Webster had of 
seizing on the vital point of a subject, and bring- 
ing it out in such a way that everybody could see 
and understand it. In this case the point was the 
distinction between a temporary embargo and one 
of unlimited duration. Mr. Webster contended 
that the latter was unconstitutional. The great 
mischief of the embargo was in Jefferson's con- 
cealed intention that it should be unlimited in 
point of time, a piece of recklessness and deceit 



44 DANIEL WEBSTER 

never fully appreciated until it had all passed into 
liistory. This Mr. Webster detected and brought 
out as the most illegal and dangerous feature of 
the measure, while he also discussed the general 
policy in its fullest extent. In 1809 he spoke be- 
fore the Phi Beta Kappa Society, upon ''The State 
of our Literature," an address without especial 
interest except as showing a very marked improve- 
ment in style, due, no doubt, to the influence of 
Mr. Mason. 

During the next three years Mr. Webster was 
completely absorbed in the practice of his profes- 
sion, and not until the declaration of war with 
England had stirred and agitated the whole coun- 
try did he again come before the public. The 
occasion of his reappearance was the Fourth of 
July celebration in 1812, when he addressed the 
W^ashington Benevolent Society at Portsmouth. 
The speech was a strong, calm statement of the 
grounds of opposition to the war. He showed 
that "maritime defense, commercial regulations, 
and national revenue " were the very cornerstones 
of the Constitution, and that these great interests 
had been crippled and abused by the departure 
from Washington's policy. He developed, with 
great force, the principal and the most unanswer- 
able argument of his party, that the navy had 
been neglected and decried because it was a Fed- 
eralist scheme, when a navy was what we wanted 
above all things, and especially when we were 
drifting into a maritime conflict. He argued 



LAW AND POLITICS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE 45 

strongly in favor of a naval war, and measures of 
naval defense, instead of wasting our resources by 
an invasion of Canada. So far he went strictly 
with his party, merely invigorating and enforcing 
their well-known principles. But when he came 
to defining the proper Ihuits of oj)position t(^ the 
war he modified very essentially the course pre- 
scribed by advanced Federalist opinions. The 
majority of that party in New England were pre- 
pared to go to the very edge of the narrow legal 
line which divides constitutional opposition from 
treasonable resistance. They were violent, bitter, 
and uncompromising in their language and pur- 
poses. From this Mr. Webster was saved by his 
breadth of view, his clear perceptions, and his in- 
tense national feeling. He says on this point : — 

" With respect to the war in which we are now in- 
volved, the course which our principles require us to 
pursue cannot be doubtful. It is now the law of the 
land, and as such we are bound to regard it. Resist- 
ance and insurrection form no i)art of our creed. Tlie 
disciples of Washington are neither tyrants in power nor 
rebels out. If we are taxed to carry on this war we 
shall disregard certain distinguished examples and shall 
pay. If our personal services are required we shall 
yield them to the precise extent of our constitutional 
liability. At the same time the world may be assured 
that we know our riglits and shall exercise them. We 
shall express our opinions on this, as on every measure 
of the government, — I trust without passion, I am cer- 
tain without fear. By the exercise of our constitutional 



4C DANIEL WEBSTER 

rhAit of suffrage, by the i)eaceal)le remedy of election, 
we shall seek to restore wisdom to our councils, and 
l)eace to our country." 

This was a sensible and patriotic opposition. 
It iei)resented tlie views of the moderate Feder- 
alists, and traced the lines which Mr. Webster 
consistently followed during the first years of his 
public life. The address concluded by pointing 
out the French trickery which had provoked the 
w^ar, and by denouncing an alliance with French 
despotism and ambition. 

This oration was printed, and ran at once through 
two editions. It led to the selection of Mr. Web- 
ster as a delegate to an assembly of the people of 
the county of Kockingham, a sort of mass conven- 
tion, held in August, 1812. There he was placed 
on the committee to prepare the address, and was 
chosen to write their report, which was adopted 
and published. This important document, widely 
known at the time as the ''Rockingham Memorial," 
was a careful argument against the w^ar, and a 
vigorous and able presentation of the Federalist 
views. It was addressed to the President, whom 
it treated with respectful severity. With much 
skill it turned Mr. Madison's own arguments 
against himself, and appealed to public opinion by 
its clear and convincing reasoning. In one point 
the memorial differed curiously from the oration 
of a month before. The latter pointed to the suf- 
frage as the mode of redress ; the former distinctly- 
hinted at and ahnost threatened secession even 



LAW AND POLITICS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE 47 

while it deplored ii dissolution of the Union as a 
possible result of the administration's policy. In 
the one case Mr. AVebster was expressing his own 
views, in the other he was giving utterance to the 
opinions of the menil)ers of his i)arty among whom 
he stood. This little incident shows the suscepti- 
bility to outside influences which formed such^ an 
odd 'trait in the character of a man so imperious 
by nature. When acting alone he spoke his own 
opinions. When in a situation where public opm- 
ion was concentrated against him, he submitted 
to modifications of his views with a curious and 
indolent indifference. 

The immediate result to Mr. Webster of the 
ability and tact which he displayed at the Rocking- 
ham convention was his election to the thirteenth 
Congress, where he took his seat in May, 1813. 
There were then many able men in the House. 
Mr. Clay was speaker, and on the floor were John 
C. Calhoun, Langdon Cheves, and William Lowndes 
of South Carolina, Forsyth and Troup of Georgia, 
IngersoU of Pennsylvania, Grundy of Tennessee, 
and McLean of Ohio, all conspicuous in the young 
nationalist war party. Macon and Eppes were 
representatives of the old Jeffersonian Republicans, 
while the Federalists were strong in the possession 
of such leaders as Pickering of Massachusetts, 
Pitkin of Connecticut, Grosvenor and Benson of 
New York, Hanson of Maryland, and William 
Gaston of North Carolina. It was a House in 
which any one might have been glad to win dis- 



48 DANIEL WEBSTER 

tinction. That IVIr. Webster was considered, at 
the outset, to be a man of great promise is shown 
by the fact that he was placed on the Committee 
on Forei<rn Rehitions, of which Mr. Calhoun was 
the head, and wliich, in the war time, was the 
most important committee of the House. 

Mr. Webster's first act was a characteristic one. 
Early in June he introduced a set of resolutions 
calling upon the President for information as to 
the time and mode in which the repeal of the 
French decrees had been communicated to our 
government. His unerring sagacity, in singling 
out the weak point in his enemy's armor and in 
choosing his own keenest weapon, was never better 
illustrated than on this occasion. We know now 
that in the negotiations for the repeal of the de- 
crees, the French government tricked us into war 
with England by most ])rofligate lying. It was 
ai)parent tlien tliat there was something wrong, 
and that either our government had been deceived, 
or had withheld the publication of the repealing 
decree until war was declared, so that England 
might not have a pretext for rescinding the obnox- 
ious orders. Either horn of the dilemma, there- 
fore, was disagreeable to the administration, and 
a disclosure could hardly fail to benefit the Fed- 
eralists. Mr. Webster supported his resolutions 
with a terse and simjde speech of explanation, so 
far as we can judge from the meagre abstract 
which has come down to us. The resolutions, 
however, were a firebrand, and lighted up an 



LAW AND POLITICS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE 49 

angry and protracted debate, but the ruling party, 
as Mr. Webster probably foresaw, did not dare 
to vote them down, and they passed by large ma- 
jorities.^ Mr. Webster spoke but once, and then 
very briefly, during the i)rogress of the debate, 
and soon after returned to New Hampshire. With 
the exception of these resolutions, he took no ac- 
tive part whatever in the business of the House 
beyond voting steadily with his party, a fact of 
which we may be sure because he was always on 
the same side as that stitnch old partisan, Timothy 
Pickerino-. 

After a summer i^assed in the performance of 
his professional duties, Mr. Webster returned to 
Washington. He was late in his coming. Con- 
gress having been in session nearly three weeks 
when he arrived to find that he had been dropped 
from the Committee on Foreign Relations. The 
dominant party probably discovered that he was 
a young man of rather too much promise and too 
formidable an opponent for such an important 
post. His resolutions had been answered at the 
previous session, after his departure, and the re- 
port, which consisted of a lame explanation of the 
mam point, and an elaborate defense of the war 
had been quietly laid aside. Mr. Webster desired 
debate on this subject, and succeeded in carryino- 
a reference of the report to a committee of the 
whole, but his opponents prevented its ever comino- 
to discussion. In the long session which ensued^I 
Mr. Webster again took comparatively little part 



50 DANIEL WEBSTER 

ill general business, but he spoke oftener than be- 
fore. He seems to have been reserving his strength 
and making sure of his ground. He defended the 
Federalists as the true friends of the navy and he 
resisted with great power the extravagant atteini)t 
to extend martial law to all citizens suspected of 
treason. On January 14, 1814, he made a long 
and well reported speech against a bill to encour- 
age enlistments. This is the first example of the 
eloquence which Mr. Webster afterwards carried 
to such high perfection. Some of his subsequent 
speeches far surpass this one, but they differ from 
it in degree, not in kind. He was now master of 
the style at which he aimed. The vehicle was 
perfected and his natural talent gave that vehicle 
abundance of thought to be conveyed. The whole 
speech is simple in form, direct and forcible. It 
has the elasticity and vigor of great strength, and 
glows with eloquence in some passages. Here, too, 
we see for the first time that power of deliberate 
and measured sarcasm which was destined to be- 
come in his hands such a formidable weapon. The 
florid rhetoric of the early days is utterly gone, 
and the thought comes to us in those short and 
pregnant sentences and in the well chosen and 
effective words which were afterwards so typical 
of the speaker. The speech itself was a party 
speech and a presentation of party arguments. It 
offered nothing new, but the familiar principles 
had hardly ever been stated in such a striking and 
impressive fashion. Mr. Webster attacked the 



LAW AND POLITICS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE 51 

war policy and the conduct of the war, and advo- 
cated defensive warfare, a navy, and the abandon- 
ment of the restrictive laws that were ruining: our 
commerce, which had been the main cause of the 
adoption of the Constitution. The conclusion of 
this speech is not far from the level of Mr. Web- 
ster's best work. It is too long for quotation, but 
a few sentences will show its quality : — 

" Give up your futile projects of invasion. Extinguish 
the fires that blaze on your inland frontier. EstabHsh 
perfect safety and defense there by adequate force. Let 
every man that sleeps on your soil sleep in security. Stop 
the blood that flows from the veins of unarmed yeo- 
manry and women and children. Give to the living time 
to bury and lament their dead in the quietness of private 
sorrow. Having performed this work of beneficence 
and mercy on your inland border, turn, and look with 
the eye of justice and compassion on your vast popula- 
tion along the coast. Unclench the iron grasp of your 
embargo. Take measures for that end before another 
sun sets. . . . Let it no longer be said that not one 
ship of force, built by your hands, yet floats upon the 
ocean. ... If then the war must be continued, go to 
the ocean. If you are seriously contending for mari- 
time rights, go to the theatre where alone those rights 
can be defended. Thither every indication of your for- 
tune points you. There the united wishes and exertions 
of the nation will go with you. Even our party divi- 
sions, acrimonious as they are, cease at the water's 
edge." 

Events soon forced the policy urged by Mr. 
Webster upon the administration, whose friends 



62 DANIEL WEBSTER 

carried first a modification of the embargo, and 
before the close of the session introduced a bill 
for its total repeal. The difficult task of advo- 
cating this measure devolved upon Mr. Calhoun, 
who sustained his cause more ingeniously than 
ingenuously. He frankly admitted that restriction 
was a failure as a war measure, but he defended 
the repeal on the ground that the condition of 
affairs in Europe had changed since the restrictive 
policy was adopted. It had indeed changed since 
the embargo of 1807, but not since the imposition 
of that of 1813, which was the one under discus- 
sion. 

Mr. Calhoun laid himself open to most unmerci- 
ful retorts, which was his misfortune, not his fault, 
for the embargo had been utterly and hopelessly 
wrong from the beginning. Mr. Webster, how- 
ever, took full advantage of the opportunity thus 
presented. His opening congratulations are in 
his best vein of stately sarcasm, and are admirably 
put. He followed this up by a new argument of 
great force, showing the colonial spirit of the re- 
strictive policy. He also dwelt with fresh vigor 
on the identification with France necessitated by 
the restrictive laws, a reproach which stung Mr. 
Calhoun and his followers more than anything 
else. He then took up the embargo policy and 
tore it to pieces, — no very difficult undertaking, 
but well performed. The shifty and shifting pol- 
icy of the government was especially distasteful 
to Mr. Webster, with his lofty conception of con- 



LAW AND POLITICS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE 53 

sistent and steady statesmanship, a point which is 
well brought out in the following passage : — 

" In a commercial country, nothing can be more ob- 
jectionable than frequent and violent changes. The 
concerns of private business do not endure such rude 
shocks but with extreme inconvenience and great loss. 
It would seem, however, that there is a class of politi- 
cians to whose taste all change is suited, to whom what- 
ever is unnatural seems wise, and all that is violent 
appears great. . . . The Embargo Act, the Non-Im- 
portation Act, and all the crowd of additions and sup- 
plements, together with all their garniture of messages, 
reports, and resolutions, are tumbhng undistinguished 
into one common grave. But yesterday this policy had 
a thousand friends and supporters ; to-day it is fallen 
and prostrate, and few ' so poor as to do it reverence.' 
Sir, a government which cannot administer the affairs of 
a nation without so frequent and such violent alterations 
in the ordinary occupations and pursuits of private life, 
has, in my opinion, little claim to the regard of the com- 
munity." 

All this is very characteristic of Mr. Webster's 
temperament in dealing with public affairs, and 
is a very good example of his power of dignified 
reproach and condemnation. 

Mr. Calhoun had said at the close of his speech, 
that the repeal of the restrictive measures should 
not be allowed to affect the double duties which 
protected manufactures. Mr. Webster discussed 
this point at length, defining his own position, 
which was that of the New England Federalists, 
who believed in free trade as an abstract principle, 



54 DANIEL WEBSTER 

and considered protection only as an expedient of 
which they wanted as little as possible. Mr. Web- 
ster set forth these views in his usual effective and 
lucid manner, but they can be considered more 
fitly at the period when he dealt with the tariff as 
a leading issue of the day and of his own public 

life. 

Mr. Webster took no further action of impor- 
tance at this session, not even participating in the 
great debate on the loan bill; but, by the manner 
in which these two speeches were referred to and 
quoted in Congress for many days after they were 
delivered, we can perceive the depth of their first 
impression. I have dwelt upon them at length 
because they are not in the collected edition of his 
speeches, where they well deserve a place, and, 
still more, because they are the first examples of 
his parliamentary eloquence which show his char- 
acteristic qualities and the action of his mind. 
Mr. Webster was a man of slow growth, not 
reaching his highest point until he was nearly fifty 
years of age, but these two speeches mark an 
advanced stage in his progress. The only fresh 
point that he made was when he declared that the 
embargo was colonial in spirit; and this thought 
proceeded from the vital principle of Mr. Web- 
ster's public life, his intense love for nationality 
and union, which grew with his growth and strength- 
ened with his strength. In other respects, these 
speeches presented simply the arguments and opin- 
ions of his party. They fell upon the ear of Con- 



LAW AND POLITICS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE 55 

gress and the country with a new and ringing 
sound because they were stated so finely and with 
such simplicity. Certainly one of them, and prob- 
ably both, were delivered without any immediate 
preparation, but tliey really had the preparation 
of years, and were the utterance of thoughts which 
had been garnered up by long meditation. He 
wisely confined himself at this time to a subject 
which had been long before his mind, and upon 
which he had gathered all the essential points by 
observation and by a study of the multitude of 
speeches and essays with which the country had 
been deluged. These early speeches, like some of 
the best of his prime, although nominally unpre- 
pared, were poured forth from the overflowing 
resources which had been the fruit of months of 
reflection, and which had been stored up by an 
unyielding memory. They had really been in 
preparation ever since the embargo pamphlet of 
1808, and that was one reason for their ripeness 
and terseness, for their easy flow and condensed 
force. I have examined with care the debates in 
that Congress. There were many able and expe- 
rienced speakers on the floor. Mr. Clay, it is 
true, took no part, and early in the session went 
to Europe. But Mr. Calhoun led in debate, and 
there were many others second only to him. Among 
all the speeches, however, those delivered by jNIr. 
Webster stand out in sharp relief. His utter- 
ances were as clear and direct as those of Mr. 
Calhoun, but they had none of the South Caro- 



56 DANIEL WEBSTER 

linian's dryness. We can best judge of their merit 
and their effect by comparing them with those 
of his associates. They were not only forcible, 
but they were vivid also and full of life, and his 
words when he was roused fell like the blows of 
a hammer on an anvil. They lacked the polish 
and richness of his later efforts, but the force and 
power of statement and the purity of diction were 
all there, and men began to realize that one des- 
tined to great achievements had entered the field 
of American politics. 

This was very apparent when Mr. Webster 
came back to Washington for the extra session 
called in September, 1814. Although he had 
made previously but two set speeches, and had 
taken comparatively little part in every-day de- 
bate, he was now acknowledged, after his few 
months of service, to be one of the foremost men 
in the House, and the strongest leader in his party. 
He differed somewhat at this time from the pre- 
vailing sentiment of the Federalists in New Eng- 
land, for the guiding principle of his life, his love 
of nationality, overrode all other influences. He 
discountenanced the measures which led to the 
Hartford Convention, and he helped to keep New 
Hampshire out of that movement; but it is an 
entire mistake to represent him as an independent 
Federalist at this period. The days of Mr. Web- 
ster's independent politics came later, when the 
Federalists had ceased to exist as a party and when 
no new ties had been formed. In the winter of 



LAW AND POLITICS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE 67 

1814 and 1815, although, like many of the moder- 
ate Federalists, he disapproved of the separatist 
movement in New England, on all other party- 
questions he acted consistently with the straitest 
of the sect. Sensibly enough, he did not consider 
the convention at Hartford, although he had no- 
thing to do with it, either treasonable or seditious ; 
and yet, much as he disliked its supposed purposes, 
he did not hesitate, in a speech on the Enlistment 
Bill, to use them as a threat to deter the adminis- 
tration from war measures. This was a favorite 
Federalist practice, gloomily to point out at this 
time the gathering clouds of domestic strife, in 
order to turn the administration back from war, 
that poor frightened administration of Mr. Mad- 
ison, which had for months been clutching fran- 
tically at every straw which seemed to promise a 
chance of peace. 

But although Mr. Webster went as steadily and 
even more strongly with his party in this session, 
he did more and better service than ever before, 
partly, perhaps, because on the questions which 
arose, his party was, in the main, entirely right. 
The strength of his party feeling is shown by his 
attitude in regard to the war taxes, upon which he 
made a quiet but effective speech. He took the 
ground that, as a member of the minority, he 
could not prevent the taxes nor stop hostilities, 
but he could protest against the war, its conduct, 
and its authors, by voting against the taxes. 
There is a nice question of political ethics here as 



58 DANIEL WEBSTER 

to how far an opposition ought to go in time of 
national war and distress, but it is certainly im- 
possible to give a more extreme expression to par- 
liamentary opposition than to refuse the supplies 
at a most critical moment in a severe conflict. 
To this last extreme of party opposition to the 
administration, Mr. Webster went. It was as 
far as he could go and remain loyal to the Union. 
But there he stopped absolutely. With the next 
step, which went outside the Union, and which his 
friends at home were considering, he would have 
nothing to do, and he would not countenance any 
separatist schemes. In the national Congress, 
however, he was prepared to advance as far as the 
boldest and bitterest in opposition, and he either 
voted against the war taxes or abstained from vot- 
ing on them, in company with the strictest parti- 
sans of the Pickering type. 

There is no need to suppose from this that Mr. 
Webster had lost in the least the liberality or 
breadth of view which always characterized him. 
He was no narrower then than when he entered 
Congress, or than when he left it. He went with 
his party because he believed it to be right, — as 
at that moment it undoubtedly was. The party, 
however, was still extreme and bitter, as it had 
been for ten years, but Mr. Webster was neither. 
He went all lengths with his friends in Congress, 
but he did not share their intensity of feeling or 
their fierce hostility to individuals. The Federal- 
ists, for instance, as a rule had ceased to call upon 



LAW AND POLITICS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE 59 

Mr. Madison, but in such intolerance Mr. Web- 
ster declined to indulge. He was always on good 
terms with the President and with all the hostile 
leaders. His opposition was extreme in principle, 
but not in manner; it was vigorous and uncompro- 
mising, but also stately and dignified. It was 
part of his large and indolent nature to accept 
much and question little; to take the ideas most 
easy and natural to him, those of his friends and 
associates, and of his native New England, without 
needless inquiry and investigation. It was part 
of the same nature, also, to hold liberal views 
after he had fairly taken sides, and never, by con- 
founding individuals with principles and purposes, 
to import into politics the fiery, biting element of 
personal hatred and malice. 

His position in the House once assured, we find 
Mr. Webster taking a much more active part in 
the daily debates than before. On these occasions 
we hear of his "deliberate, conversational" man- 
ner, another of the lessons learned from Mr. 
Mason when that gentleman, standing so close to 
the jury box that he could have "laid his finger 
on the foreman's nose," as Mr. Webster said, 
chatted easily with each juryman, and won a suc- 
cession of verdicts. But besides the daily debate, 
Mr. Webster spoke at length on several important 
occasions. This was the case with the Enlistment 
Bill, which involved a forced draft, including 
minors, and was deemed unconstitutional by the 
Eederalists. Mr. Webster had "a hand," as he 



60 DANIEL WEBSTER 

puts it, — a strong one, we may be sure, — in kill- 
ing "Mr. Monroe's conscription." 

The most important measure, however, with 
which Mr. Webster was called to deal, and to 
which he gave his best efforts, was the attempt to 
establish a national bank. There were three par- 
ties in the House on this question. The first rep- 
resented the "old Republican" doctrines, and was 
opposed to any bank. The second represented 
the theories of Hamilton and the Federalists, and 
favored a bank with a reasonable capital, specie- 
paying, and free to decide about making loans to 
the government. The third body was composed 
of members of the national war party, who were 
eager for a bank merely to help the government 
out of its appalling difficulties. They, therefore, 
favored an institution of large capital, non-specie- 
paying, and obliged to make heavy loans to the 
government, which involved, of course, an irre- 
deemable paper currency. In a word, there was 
the party of no bank, the party of a specie bank, 
and the party of a huge paper-money bank. The 
second of these parties, with which of course 
Mr. Webster acted, held the key of the situa- 
tion. No bank could be established unless it 
was based on their principles. The first bill, 
proposing a paper-money bank, originated in the 
House, and was killed there by a strong majority, 
Mr. Webster making a long speech against it 
which has not been preserved. The next bill came 
from the Senate, and was also for a paper-money 



LAW AND POLITICS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE 61 

bank. Against this scheme Mr. Webster made 
a second elaborate speech, which is reprinted in 
his works. His genius for arranging and stating 
facts held its full strength in questions of finance, 
and he now established his reputation as a master 
in that difficult department of statesmanship. His 
recent studies of economical questions in late Eng- 
lish works and in English history gave freshness 
to what he said, and in clearness of argument, in 
range of view, and wisdom of judgment, he showed 
himself a worthy disciple of the school of Ham- 
ilton. His argument proceeded on the truest 
economical and commercial principles, and was, 
indeed, unanswerable. He then took his stand as 
the foe of irredeemable paper, whether in war or 
peace, and of wild, unrestrained banking, a posi- 
tion from which he never wavered, and in support 
of which he rendered to the country some of his 
best service as a public man. The bill was de- 
feated by the casting vote of the speaker. When 
the result was announced, Mr. Calhoun w^as utterly 
overwhelmed. He cared little for the bank but 
deeply for the government, which, as it was not 
known that peace had been made, seemed to be on 
the verge of ruin. He came over to Mr. Webster, 
and, bursting into tears, begged the latter to aid 
in establishing a proper bank, a request which 
was freely granted. 

The vote was then reconsidered, the bill recom- 
mitted and brought back, with a reduced capital, 
and freed from the government power to force 



G2 DANIEL WEBSTER 

loans and suspend specie payments. This mea- 
sure was passed by a large majority, composed of 
the Federalists and the friends of the government, 
but it was the i)lan' of the former which had pre- 
vailed. The President vetoed the bill for a variety 
of reasons, duly stated, but really, as Mr. Web- 
ster said, because a sound bank of this sort was 
not in favor with the administration. Another 
paper-money scheme was introduced, and the con- 
flict began again, but was abruptly terminated by 
the news of peace, and on March 4 the thirteenth 
Congress came to an end. 

The fourteenth Congress, to which he had been 
reelected, Mr. Webster said many years after- 
ward, was the most remarkable for talents of any 
he had ever seen. To the leaders of marked abil- 
ity in the previous Congress, most of whom had 
been reelected, several others were added. Mr. 
Clay returned from Europe to take again an active 
part. Mr. Pinkney, the most eminent practicing 
lawyer in the country, recently attorney-general 
and minister to England, whom John Randolph, 
witli characteristic insolence, "believed to be from 
Maryland," was there until his appointment to the 
Russian mission. Last, but not least, there was 
John Randolph himself, wildly eccentric and ven- 
omously eloquent, — sometimes witty, always odd 
and amusing, talking incessantly on everything, 
so that the reporters gave him up in despair, and 
with whom Mr. Webster came to a definite under- 
standing before the close of the session. 



LAW AND POLITICS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE 63 

Mr. Webster did not take his seat until Febru- 
ary, being detained at the North by the illness of 
his daughter Grace. When he arrived he found 
Congress at work upon a bank bill possessing the 
same objectionable features of paper money and 
large capital as the former schemes which he had 
helped to overthrow. He began his attack upon 
this dangerous plan by considering the evil condi- 
tion of the currency. He showed that the cur- 
rency of the United States was sound because it 
was gold and silver, in his opinion the only consti- 
tutional medium, but that the country was flooded 
by the irredeemable paper of the state banks. 
Congress could not regulate the state banks, but 
they could force them to specie payments by refus- 
ing to receive any notes which were not paid in 
specie by the bank which issued them. Passing 
to the proposed national bank, he reiterated the 
able arguments which he had made in the previous 
Congress against the large capital, the power to 
suspend specie payments, and the stock feature of 
the bank, which he thought would lead to specula- 
tion and control by the state banks. This last 
point is the first instance of that financial foresight 
for which Mr. Webster was so remarkable, and 
which shows so plainly the soundness of his know- 
ledge in regard to economical matters. A violent 
speculation in bank stock did ensue, and the first 
years of the new institution were troubled, disor- 
derly, and anything but creditable. The opposi- 
tion of Mr. Webster and those who thought with 



64 DANIEL WEBSTER 

him, resulted in the reduction of the capital and 
the removal of the power to suspend specie pay- 
ments. But although shorn of its most obnoxious 
features, Mr. Webster voted against the bill on 
its final passage on account of the participation 
permitted to the government in its management. 
lie was quite right, but, after the bank was well 
established, he supported it as Lord Thurlow 
promised to do in regard to the dissenter's reli- 
gion. Indeed, Mr. Webster ultimately so far 
lost his original dislike to this bank that he be- 
came one of its warmest adherents. The plan 
was defective, but the scheme, on the whole, worked 
better than had been expected. 

Immediately after the passage of the bank bill, 
Mr. Calhoun introduced a bill requiring the reve- 
nue to be collected in lawful money of the United 
States. A sharp debate ensued, and the bill was 
lost. Mr. Webster at once offered resolutions 
requiring all government dues to be paid in coin, 
in treasury notes, or in notes of the Bank of the 
United States. He supported these resolutions, 
thus daringly put forward just after the principle 
they involved had been voted down, in a speech 
of singular power, clear, convincing, and full of 
information and illustration. He elaborated the 
ideas contained in his previous remarks on the 
currency, displaying with great force the evils of 
irredeemable paper, and the absolute necessity of 
a sound currency based on specie payments. He 
won a signal victory by the passage of his resolu- 



LAW AND POLITICS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE 65 

tions, which brought about resumption, and, after 
the bank was firmly established, gave us a sound 
currency and a safe medium of exchange. This 
was one of the most conspicuous services ever ren- 
dered by Mr. Webster to the business interests 
and good government of the country, and he de- 
serves the full credit, for he triumphed where Mr. 
Calhoun had just been defeated. 

Mr. Webster took more or less part in all the 
questions which afterwards arose in the House, 
especially on the tariff, but his great efforts were 
those devoted to the bank and the currency. The 
only other incident of the session was an invitation 
to fight a duel sent him by John Randolph. This 
was the only challenge ever received by Mr. Web- 
ster. He never could have seemed a very happy 
subject for such missives, and, moreover, he never 
indulged in language calculated to provoke them. 
Randolph, however, would have challenged any- 
body or anything, from Henry Clay to a field- 
mouse, if the fancy happened to strike him. Mr. 
Webster's reply is a model of dignity and veiled 
contempt. He refused to admit Randolph's right 
to an explanation, alluded to that gentleman's 
lack of courtesy in the House, denied his right to 
call him out, and wound up by saying that he did 
not feel bound to risk his life at any one's bid- 
ding, but should ''always be prepared to repel, in 
a suitable manner, the aggression of any man 
who may presume on this refusal." One cannot 
help smiling over this last clause, with its sugges- 



66 DANIEL WEBSTER 

tion of personal violence, as the two men rise be- 
fore the fancy, —the big, swarthy black-haired 
son of the northern hills, with his robust common 
sense, and the sallow, lean, sickly Virginia planter, 
not many degrees removed mentally from the pa- 
tients in Bedlam. 

In the affairs of the next session of the four- 
teenth Congress Mr. Webster took scarcely any 
part. He voted for Mr. Calhoun's internal im- 
provement bill, although without entering the de- 
bate, and he also voted to pass the bill over Mr. 
Madison's veto. This was sound Hamiltonian 
Federalism, and in entire consonance with the na- 
tional sentiments of Mr. Webster. On the con- 
stitutional point, which he is said to have examined 
with some care, he decided in accordance with the 
opinions of his party, and with the doctrine of 
liberal construction, to which he always adhered. 

On March 4, 1817, the fourteenth Congress 
expired, and with it the term of Mr. Webster's 
service. Five years were to intervene before he 
again appeared in the arena of national politics. 
This retirement from active public life was due to 
professional reasons. In nine years Mr. Webster 
had attained to the very summit of his profession 
in New Hampshire. He was earning two thou- 
sand dollars a year, and in that hardy and poor 
community he could not hope to earn more. To 
a man with such great and productive talents, and 
with a growing family, a larger field had become 
an absolute necessity. In June, 1816, therefore, 



LAW AND POLITICS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE 67 

Mr. Webster removed from Portsmouth to Boston. 
TJiat he gained by the change is apparent from 
the fact that the first year after his removal his 
professional income did not fall short of twenty 
tliousand dollars. The first suggestion of the pos- 
sibilities of wealth offered to his abilities in a suit- 
able field came from his going to Washington. 
There, in the winter of 1813 and 1814, he was 
admitted to the bar of the Supreme Court of the 
United States, before which he tried two or three 
cases, and this opened the vista of a professional 
career, which he felt would give him verge and 
room enough, as well as fit remuneration. From 
this beginning the Supreme Court practice, which 
soon led to the removal to Boston, rapidly in- 
creased, until, in the last session of his term, it 
occupied most of his time. This withdrawal from 
the duties of Congress, however, was not due to 
a sacrifice of his time to his professional engage- 
ments, but to the depression caused by his first 
great grief, which must have rendered the noise 
and dust of debate most distasteful to him. Mr. 
and Mrs. Webster had arrived in Washington for 
this last session, in December, 1816, and were 
recalled to Boston by the illness of their little 
daughter Grace, who was their oldest child, singu- 
larly bright and precocious, with much of her 
father's look and talent, and of her mother's sen- 
sibility. She was a favorite with her fkther, and 
tenderly beloved by him. After her parents' re- 
turn she sank rapidly, the victim of consiunption. 



68 DANIEL WEBSTER 

When the last hour was at hand, the child, rous- 
ing from sleep, asked for her father. He came, 
raised her upon his arm, and, as he did so, she 
smiled upon him and died. It is a little incident 
in the life of a great man, but a child's instinct 
does not err at such a moment, and her dying 
smile sheds a flood of soft light upon the deep 
and warm affections of Mr. Webster's solemn and 
reserved nature. It was the first great grief. Mr. 
Webster wept convulsively as he stood beside the 
dead, and those who saw him so wrung by anguish 
of the heart never forgot the sight. 

Thus the period which began at Portsmouth in 
1807 closed in Boston, in 1817, with the death of 
the eldest born. In that decade Mr. Webster had 
advanced with great strides from the position of 
a raw and youthful lawyer in a back country town 
of New Hampshire. He had reached the highest 
professional eminence in his own State, and had 
removed to a wider sphere, where he at once took 
rank with the best lawyers. He was a leading 
practitioner in the highest national court. During 
his two terms in Congress he had become a leader 
of his party, and had won a solid national reputa- 
tion. In those years he had rendered conspicuous 
service to the business interests of the nation, and 
had established himself as one of the ablest states- 
men of the country in matters of finance. He had 
defined his position on the tariff as a free-trader 
in theory and a very moderate protectionist when 
])rotection was unavoidable, a true representative 



LAW AND POLITICS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE 69 

of the doctrine of the New England Federalists. 
He had taken up his ground as the champion of 
specie payments and of the liberal interpretation 
of the Constitution, which authorized internal im- 
provements. While he had not shrunk from ex- 
treme opposition to the administration during the 
war, he had kept himself entirely clear from the 
separatist sentiment of New England in the year 
1814. He left Congress with a realizing sense of 
his own growing powers, and, rejoicing in his 
strength, he turned to his profession and to his 
new duties in his new home. 



CHAPTER III 

THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE. — MR. WEBSTER 

AS A LAWYER 

There is a vague tradition that when Mr. Web- 
ster took up his residence in Boston, some of the 
worthies of that ancient Puritan town were dis- 
posed at first to treat him rather cavalierly and 
make him understand that because he was great 
in New Hampshire it did not follow that he was 
also great in Massachusetts. They found very 
quickly, however, that it was worse than useless 
to attempt anything of this sort with a man who, 
by his mere look and presence whenever he en- 
tered a room, drew all eyes to himself and hushed 
the murmur of conversation. It is certain that 
Mr. Webster soon found himself the friend and 
associate of all the agreeable and distinguished 
men of the town, and that he rapidly acquired 
that general popularity which, in those days, went 
with him everywhere. It is also certain that he 
at once and without effort assumed the highest 
position at the bar as the recognized equal of its 
most eminent leaders. With an income increased 
tenfold and promising still further enlargement, 
a practice in which one fee probably surpassed 



THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE 71 

the earnings of three months in New Hampshire, 
with an agreeable society about him, popular 
abroad, happy and beloved at home, nothing could 
have been more auspicious than these opening 
years of his life in Boston. 

The period upon which he then entered, and 
during which he withdrew from active public ser- 
vice to devote himself to his profession, was a very 
important one in his career. It was a period 
marked by a rapid intellectual growth and by the 
first exhibition of his talents on a large scale. It 
embraces, moreover, two events, landmarks in the 
life of Mr. Webster, which placed him before the 
country as one of the first and the most eloquent 
of her constitutional lawyers, and as the great 
master in the art of occasional oratory. The first 
of these events was the argument in the Dartmouth 
College case; the second was the delivery of the 
Plymouth oration. 

i do not propose to enter into or discuss the 
merits or demerits of the constitutional and legal 
theories and principles involved in the famous 
"college causes," or in any other of the great cases 
subsequently argued by Mr. Webster. In a bio- 
graphy of this kind it is sufficient to examine Mr. 
Webster's connection with the Dartmouth College 
case, and endeavor, by a study of his arguments 
in that and in certain other hardly less important 
causes, to estimate properly the character and 
quality of his abilities as a lawyer, both in the 
ordinary acceptation of the term and in dealing 
with constitutional questions. 



72 DANIEL WEBSTER 

The complete history of the Dartmouth College 
case Is very curious and deserves more than a pass- 
ing notice. Until within three years it is not too 
much to say that it was quite unknown, and its 
condition is but little better now. In 1879 Mr. 
John M. Shirley published a volume entitled the 
''Dartmouth College Causes," which is a monu- 
ment of careful study and thorough research. 
Most persons would conclude that it was a work 
of merely legal interest, appealing to a limited 
class of professional readers. Even those into 
whose hands it chanced to come have probably 
been deterred from examining it as it deserves by 
the first chapter, which is very obscure, and by 
the confusion of the narrative which follows. Yet 
this monograph, which has so unfortunately suf- 
fered from a defective arrangement of material, is 
of very great value, not only to our legal and con- 
stitutional liistory, but to the ])olItIcal history of 
the time and to a knowledge of the distinguished 
actors in a series of events which resulted In the 
establishment of one of the most far-reaching of 
constitutional doctrines, one that has been a living 
question ever since the year 1819, and is at this 
moment of vast practical Importance. Mr. Shirley 
has drawn forth from the oblivion of manuscript 
a collection of documents which, taken in conjunc- 
tion with those already in print, throws a flood of 
light upon a dark place of the past and gives to 
a dry constitutional question the vital and human 
interest of political and personal history. 



THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE 73 

111 his early clays, Eleazer Wlieelock, tlie founder 
of Dartnioutli College, had had much religious 
controversy with Dr. Bellamy of Connecticut, who 
was like himself a graduate of Yale. Wheelock 
was a Presbyterian and a liberal, Bellamy a Con- 
gregationalist and strictly orthodox. The charter 
of Dartmouth was free from any kind of religious 
discrimination. By his will the elder Wheelock 
provided in such a way that his son succeeded him 
in the presidency of the college. In 1793 Judge 
Niles, a pupil of Bellamy, became a trustee of the 
college, and he and John Wheelock represented 
the opposite views which they resj^ectively inherited 
from tutor and father. They were formed for 
mutual hostility, and the contest began some twelve 
years before it reached the public. The trustees 
and the president were then all Federalists, and 
there would seem to have been no differences of 
either a political or a religious nature. The trou- 
ble arose from the resistance of a minority of the 
trustees to what they termed the "family dynasty." 
Wheelock, however, maintained his ascendency 
until 1809, when his enemies obtained a majority 
in the board of trustees, and thereafter admitted 
no friend of the president to the government, and 
used every effort to subdue the dominant dynasty. 

In New Hampshire, at that period, the Feder- 
alists were the ruling party, and the Congregation- 
alists formed the state church. The people were, 
in practice, taxed to support Congregational 
churches, and the clergy of that denomination 



74 DANIEL WEBSTER 

were exempted from taxation. All the Congrega- 
tional ministers were stanch Federalists and most 
of their parishiouei'S were of the same party. The 
college, the only seat of learning in the State, 
was on(i of the Federalist and Congregational 
strongholds. 

After several yeai-s of fruitless and bitter con- 
flict, the Wheelock party, in 1815, brought their 
grievances before the public in an elaborate pam- 
phlet. This led to a rejoinder and a war of pam- 
phlets ensued, which was soon transferred to the 
newspapers, and created a great sensation and a 
profound interest. Wheelock now contemplated 
legal proceedings. Mr. Plumer was in ill health. 
Judge Smith and Mr. Mason were allied with the 
trustees, and the president therefore went to Mr. 
Webster, consulted him professionally, ])aid him, 
and obtained a promise of his future services. 
About the time of this consultation, Wheelock sent 
a memorial to the legislature, charging the trustees 
with misapplication of the funds, and various 
breaches of trust, religious intolerance, and a vio- 
lation of the charter in their attacks upon the 
presidential office, and prayed for a committee of 
investigation. The trustees met him boldly and 
offered a sturdy resistance, denying all the charges, 
especially that of religious intolerance; but the 
counnittee was voted by a large majority. On 
August 5, AVheelock, as soon as he learned that 
the committee was to have a hearing, wrote to 
Mr. Webster, reminding him of their consultation. 



THE DAR'niUUTH COLLEGE CASE 75 

inclosing a fee of twenty dollars, and asking him 
to appear before the committee. Mr. Webster 
did not come, and Wheelock had to go on as best 
he could witliout him. One of Wheelock's friends, 
Mr. Dunham, wrote a very indignant letter to 
Mr. Webster on his failure to appear; to which 
Mr. Webster replied that he had seen Wheelock 
and they had contemplated a suit in court, but 
that at the time of the hearing he was otherwise 
engaged, and moreover that he did not regard a 
summons to appear before a legislative committee 
as a professional call, adding that he was by no 
means sure that the president was wholly in the 
right. The truth was, that many of Mr. Web- 
ster's strongest personal and political friends, and 
most of the leaders with whom he was associated 
in the control of the Federalist party, were either 
trustees themselves or closely allied with the trus- 
tees. In the interval between the consultation 
with Wheelock and the committee hearing, these 
friends and leaders saw Mr. Webster, and pointed 
out to him that he must not desert them, and that 
this college controversy was fast developing into 
a party question. Mr. Webster was convinced, 
and abandoned Wheelock, making, as has been 
seen, a very unsatisfactory explanation of his con- 
duct. In this way he finally parted company with 
Wheelock, and was thereafter irrevocably engaged 
on the side of the trustees. 

Events now moved rapidly. The trustees, with- 
out heeding the advice of Mr. Mason to delay, 



76 DANIEL WEBSTER 

removed Wheelock from the presidency, and ap- 
pointed in his place the Rev. Francis Brown. 
This fanned the flame of popular excitement, and 
such a defiance of the legislative committee threw 
the whole question into jxditics. As Mr. JNIason 
had foreseen when he warned the trustees against 
hasty action, all the Democrats, all members of 
sects other than the Congregational, and all free- 
thinkers generally, were united against the trus- 
tees, and consequently against the Federalists. 
The election came on. Wheelock, who was a 
Federalist, went over to the enemy, carrying his 
friends with him, and Mr. Plumer, the Democratic 
candidate, was elected governor, together with a 
Democratic legislature. Mr. Webster perceived 
at once that the trustees were in a bad position. 
He advised that every effort should be made to 
soothe the Democrats, and that the pur})ose of 
founding a new college should be noised abroad, 
in order to create alarm. Strategy, however, was 
vain. Governor Plumer declared against the trus- 
tees in his message, and the legislature, in June, 
1816, despite every sort of protest and remon- 
strance, passed an act to reorganize the college, 
and virtually to place it within the control of the 
State. The governor and council at once pro- 
ceeded to choose trustees and overseers under the 
new law, and among those thus selected was Joseph 
Story of Massachusetts. 

Both boards of trustees assembled. The old 
board turned out Judge Woodward, their secre- 



THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE 77 

tary, who was a friend to Wlieelock and secretary 
also of the new board, and, receiving a thousand 
dollars from a friend of one of the professors, re- 
solved to fight. President Brown refused to obey 
the summons of the new trustees, who expelled 
the old board by resolution. Thereupon the old 
board brought suit against Woodward for the 
college seal and other property, and the case came 
on for trial in May, 1817. Mr. Mason and Judge 
Smith appeared for the college, George Sullivan 
and Ichabod Bartlett for Woodward and the state 
board. The case was argued and then went over 
to the September term of the same year, at Exeter, 
when Mason and Smith were joined by Mr. Web- 
ster. 

The cause was then argued again on both sides 
and with signal ability. In point of talent the 
counsel for the college were vastly superior to their 
opponents, but Sullivan and Bartlett were never- 
theless strong men and thoroughly prepared. Sul- 
livan was a good lawyer and a fluent and ready 
speaker, with great power of illustration. Bartlett 
was a shrewd, hard-headed man, very keen and 
incisive, and one whom it was impossible to outwit 
or deceive. He indulged, in his argument, in 
some severe reflections upon Mr. Webster's con- 
duct toward Wheelock, which so much incensed 
Mr. Webster that he referred to Mr. Bartlett's 
argument in a most contemptuous way, and stren- 
uously opposed the publication of the remarks 
"personal or injurious to counsel." 



78 DANIEL WEBSTER 

The weight of the arguineiit for the college fell 
upon Mason and Smith, who spoke for two and 
four hours respectively. Sullivan and Bartlett 
occupied three hours, and the next day Mr. Web- 
ster closed for the plaintiffs in a speech of two 
hours. Mr. Webster spoke with great force, going 
evidently beyond the limits of legal argument, and 
winding up with a splendid sentimental appeal 
which drew tears from the crowd in the Exeter 
court-room, and which he afterwards used in an 
elaborated form and with similar effect before the 
Supreme Court at Washington. 

It now becomes necessary to state briefly the 
points at issue in this case, which were all fully 
argued by the counsel on both sides. Mr. Mason's 
brief, which really covered the whole case, was 
that the acts of the legislature were not obligatory, 
1, because they were not within the general scope 
of legislative power; 2, because they violated cer- 
tain provisions of the Constitution of New Hamp- 
shire restraining legislative power; 3, because they 
violated the Constitution of the United States. 
In Farrar's report of Mason's speech, twenty-three 
pages are devoted to the first point, eight to the 
second, and six to the third. In other words, the 
third point, involving the great constitutional doc- 
trine on which the case was finally decided at 
Washington, tlie doctrine that the legislature, by 
its acts, had impaired the obligation of a contract, 
was passed over lightly. In so doing Mr. Mason 
was not alone. Neither he nor Judge Smith nor 





<uX^l^-^kP^r^ 



THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE 79 

Mr. AYebster nor the court nor the counsel on the 
other side, attached much importance to this point. 
Curiously enough, the theory had been originated 
many years before, by Wheelock himself, at a 
time when he expected that the minority of the 
trustees would invoke the aid of the legislature 
aofainst him, and his idea had been remembered. 
It was revived at the time of the newspaper con- 
troversy, and was pressed upon the attention of the 
trustees and upon that of their counsel. But the 
lawyers attached little weight to the suggestion, 
although they introduced it and argued it briefly. 
Mason, Smith, and Webster all relied for success 
on the ground covered by the first point in Mason's 
brief. This is called by Mr. Shirley the "Par- 
sons' view%" from the fact that it was largely 
drawn from an argument made by Chief Justice 
Parsons in regard to visitatorial powers at Harvard 
College. Briefly stated, the argument was that 
the college was an institution founded by private 
persons for particular uses; that the charter was 
given to perpetuate such uses ; that misconduct of 
the trustees was a question for the courts, and that 
the legislature, by its interference, transcended its 
powers. To these general principles, strengthened 
by particular clauses in the Constitution of New 
Hampshire, the counsel for the college trusted for 
victory. The theory of impairing the obligation 
of contracts they introduced, but they did not insist 
on it, or hope for much from it. On this point, 
however, and, of course, on this alone, the case 



80 DANIEL WEBSTER 

went up to the Supreme Court. In December, 
1817, Mr. Webster wrote to Mr. Mason, regret- 
ting that the case went up on "one point only." 
He occupied himself at this time in devising cases 
which should raise what he considered the really 
vital points, and which, coming within the juris- 
diction of the United States, could be taken to the 
Circuit Court, and thence to the Supreme Court 
at Washington. These cases, in accordance with 
his suggestion, were begun, but before they came 
on in the Circuit Court, Mr. Webster made his 
great effort in Washington. Three quarters of 
his legal argument were there devoted to the points 
in the Circuit Court cases, which were not in any 
way before the Supreme Court in the College v. 
Woodward. So little, indeed, did Mr. Webster 
think of the great constitutional question which 
has made the case famous, that he forced the other 
points in where he admitted that they had no 
proper standing, and argued them at length. 
They were touched upon by Marshall, who, how- 
ever, decided wholly upon the constitutional ques- 
tion, and they were all thrown aside by Judge 
Washington, who declared them irrelevant, and 
rested his decision solely and properly on the con- 
stitutional point. Two months after his Washing- 
ton argument, Mr. Webster, still urging forward 
the Circuit Court cases, wrote to Mr. Mason that 
all the questions must be brought properly before 
the Supreme Court, and that, on the "general 
principle" that the state legislature could not 



THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE 81 

divest vested rights, strengthened by the constitu- 
tional provisions of New nani})shlre, he was sure 
they could defeat their adversaries. Thus this 
doctrine of "impairing the obligation of contracts," 
which produced a decision in its effects more far- 
reaching and of more general interest than perhaps 
any other ever made in this country, was imported 
into the case at the suggestion of laymen, was 
little esteemed by counsel, and was comparatively 
neglected in every argument. 

It is necessary to go back now, for a moment, 
in the history of the case. The New Hampshire 
court decided against the plaintiffs on every point, 
and gave a very strong and elaborate judgment, 
which Mr. Webster acknowledged was '^able, 
plausible, and ingenious." After much wrangling, 
the counsel agreed on a special verdict, and took 
the case up on a writ of error to the Supreme 
Court. Mason and Smith were unable or unwill- 
ing to go to Washington, and the case was in- 
trusted to Mr. Webster, who secured the assistance 
of Mr. Joseph Hopkinson of Philadelphia. The 
case for the State, hitherto ably managed, was now 
confided to Mr. John Holmes of Maine, and Mr. 
Wirt, the attorney -general, who handled it very 
badly. Holmes, an active, fluent Democratic pol- 
itician, made a noisy, rhetorical, political speech, 
which pleased his opponents and disgusted his 
clients and their friends. Mr. Wirt, loaded with 
business cares of every sort, came into court quite 
unprepared, and endeavored to make up for his 



82 DANIEL WEBSTER 

deficiencies by declamation. On the other side the 
case was managed with consummate skill. IIop- 
kinson was a sound lawyer, and, being thoroughly 
prepared, made a good legal argument. Tlie 
burden of the conflict was, however, borne by Mr. 
Webster, who was more interested personally than 
professionally, and who, liaving raised money in 
Boston to defray the expenses of the suit, came 
into the arena at Washington armed to the teeth, 
and in the full lustre of his great powers. 

The case was heard on March 10, 1818, and 
was opened by Mr. Webster. He had studied the 
arguments of his adversaries below, and the vigor- 
ous hostile opinion of the New Hampshire judges. 
He was in possession of the thorough argument 
emanating from the penetrating mind of Mr. Mason 
and fortified and extended by the ample learning 
and judicial wisdom of Judge Smith. To the 
work of his eminent associates he could add nothing 
more than one not very important point, and a 
few cases which his far-ranging and retentive 
memory supplied. All the notes, minutes, and 
arguments of Smith and Mason were in his hands. 
It is only just to say that Mr. Webster tells all 
this himself, and that he gives all credit to his 
colleagues, whose arguments he says "he clumsily 
put together," and of which he adds that he could 
only be the reciter. The facult}^ of obtaining and 
using the valuable work of other men, one of the 
characteristic qualities of a high and command- 
ing order of mind, was even then strong in Mr. 



THE DARTxMOUTH COLLEGE CASE 83 

Webster. But in that bright period of early man- 
hood it was accompanied by a frank and generous 
acknowledgment of all and more than all the 
intellectual aid he received from others. lie truly 
and 2:)roperly awarded to Mason and Smith all 
the credit for the law and for the legal points and 
theories set forth on their side, and modestly says 
that he was merely the arranger and reciter of 
other men's thoughts. But how much that ar- 
rangement and recitation meant! There were, 
perhaps, no lawyers better fitted than Mason and 
Smith to examine a case and prepare an argument 
enriched with everything that learning and saga- 
city could suggest. But when Mr. Webster burst 
upon the court and the nation with his great ap- 
peal, it was certain that there was no man in the 
land who could so arrange arguments and facts, 
who could state them so powerfully and with such 
a grand and fitting eloquence. 

The legal part of the argument was printed in 
Farrar's report and also in Wheaton's, after it 
had been carefully revised by Mr. Webster with 
the arguments of his colleagues before him. This 
legal and constitutional discussion shows plainly 
enough Mr. Webster's easy and firm grasp of 
facts and principles, and his power of strong, ef- 
fective, and lucid statement; but it is in its very 
nature dry, cold, and lawyer-like. It gives no 
conception of the glowing vehemence of the deliv- 
ery, or of those omitted portions of the speech 
which dealt with matters outside the domain of 



Si DANIEL WEBSTER 

law, and which were introduced by Mr. Webster 
with suc'li telling and important results. lie spoke 
for five hours, but in the printed report his speech 
occupies only three pages more than that of Mr. 
Mason in the court below. Both were slow speak- 
ers, and thus there is a great difference in time 
to be accounted for, even after making every 
allowance for the peroration which we have from 
another source, and for the wealth of legal and 
historical illustration with which Mr. Webster am- 
plified his presentation of the question. "Some- 
thing was left out," Mr. Webster says, and that 
something which must have occupied in its delivery 
nearly an hour was the most conspicuous example 
of the generalship by which Mr. Webster achieved 
victory, and which was wholly apart from his law. 
This art of management had already been displayed 
in the treatment of the oases made up for the 
Circuit Courts, and in the elaborate and irrelevant 
lejral discussion which Mr. Webster introduced 
before the Supreme Court. But this management 
now entered on a much higher stage, where it was 
destined to win victory, and exhibited in a high 
degree tact and knowledge of men. Mr. Webster 
was fully aware that he could rely, in any aspect 
of the case, upon the sympathy of Marshall and 
Washington. He was equally certain of the un- 
yielding opposition of Duvall and Todd; the other 
three judges, Johnson, Livingston, and Story, 
were known to be adverse to the college, but were 
possible converts. The first point was to increase 



THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE 85 

the sympathy of the chief justice to an eager and 
even passionate support. Mr. Webster knew the 
chord to strike, and he touched it with a master 
hand. This was the "something left out," of 
which we know the general drift, and we can easily 
imagine the effect. In the midst of all the legal 
and constitutional arguments, relevant and irrele- 
vant, even in the pathetic appeal which he used so 
well in behalf of his Alma Mater, Mr. Webster 
boldly and yet skillfully introduced the political 
view of the case. So delicately did he do it that 
an attentive listener did not realize that he was 
straying from the field of "mere reason " into that 
of political passion. Here no man could equal 
him or help him, for here his eloquence had f uU 
scope, and on this he relied to arouse Marshall, 
whom he thoroughly understood. In occasional 
sentences he pictured his beloved college under the 
wise rule of Federalists and of the Church. He 
depicted the party assault that was made upon 
her. He showed the citadel of learning threatened 
with unholy invasion and falling helplessly into 
the hands of Jacobins and free-thinkers. As the 
tide of his resistless and solemn eloquence, mingled 
with his masterly argument, flowed on, we can 
imagine how the great chief justice roused like an 
old war-horse at the sound of the trumpet. The 
words of the speaker carried him back to the early 
years of the century, when, in the full Hush of 
manhood, at the head of his court, the last strong- 
hold of Federalism, the last bulwark of sound gov- 



86 DANIEL WEBSTER 

ernment, he had faced the power of the triumphant 
Democrats. Once more it was Marshall ajraiust 
Jefferson, — the judge against the President. Then 
he had preserved the ark of the Constitution. 
Then he had seen the angry waves of popular feel- 
ing breaking vainly at his feet. Now, in his old 
age, the conflict was revived. Jacobinism was 
raising its sacrilegious hand against the temples of 
learning, against the friends of order and good 
government. The joy of battle must have glowed 
once more in the old man's breast as he grasped 
anew his weapons and prepared with all the force 
of his indomitable will to raise yet another con- 
stitutional barrier across the path of his ancient 
enemies. 

We cannot but feel that Mr. Webster's lost 
passages, embodying this political appeal, did the 
work, and that the result was settled when the 
political passions of the chief justice were fairly 
aroused. Marshall would probably have brought 
about the decision by the sole force of his imperi- 
ous will. But Mr. Webster did a good deal of 
effective work after the arguments were all fin- 
ished, and no account of the case would be com- 
plete without a glance at the famous peroration 
with which he concluded his speech and in which 
he boldly flung aside all vestige of legal reasoning, 
and sj^oke directly to the passions and emotions of 
his hearers. 

When he had finished his argument he stood 
silent for some moments, until every eye was fLxed 



THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE 87 

upon him, then, addressing the chief justice, he 
said : — 

" This, sir, is my case. It is the case not merely of 
that humble institution, it is the case of every coUege 
in our land. . . . 

" Sir, you may destroy this little institution ; it is 
weak ; it is in your hands ! I know it is one of the 
lesser lights in the literary horizon of our country. 
You may put it out. But if you do so you must carry 
through your work ! You must extinguish, one after 
another, all those greater lights of science which for 
more than a century have thrown their radiance over 
our land. It is, sir, as I have said, a smaU college. 
And yet there are those who love it." 

Plere his feelings mastered him; his eyes filled 
with tears, his lips quivered, his voice was choked. 
In broken words of tenderness he spoke of his 
attachment to the college, and his tones seemed 
filled with the memories of home and boyhood; of 
early affections and youthful privations and strug- 
gles. 

" The court-room," says Mr. Goodrich, to whom we 
owe this description, " during these two or three min- 
utes presented an extraordinary spectacle. Chief Jus- 
tice Marshall, with his tall and gaunt figure bent over 
as if to catch the sliglitest whisper, the deep furrows of 
his cheek expanded with emotion and his eyes suffused 
with tears ; Mr. Justice Washington, at his side, with 
his small and emaciated frame, and countenance more 
like marble than I ever saw on any other human being, 
— • leaning forward with an eager, troubled look ; and 



88 DANIEL WEBSTER 

the remainder of the court at the two extremities, press- 
ing, as it were, to a single point, while the audience 
below were wrapping themselves round in closer folds 
beneath the bench, to catch each look and every move- 
ment of the speaker's face. . . . 

" Mr. Webster had now recovered his composure, and, 
fixing his keen eye on the chief justice, said in that 
deep tone with which he sometimes thrilled the heart of 
an audience : — 

" ' Sir, I know not how others may feel ' (glancing 
at the opponents of the college before him), ' but for 
myself, when I see my Alma Mater surrounded, like 
Caesar in the senate-house, by those who are reiterating 
stab after stab, I would not, for this right hand, have 
her turn to me, and say, Et tu quoqiie^ mi fill / And 
thou too, my son I ' " 

This outbreak of feeling was perfectly genuine. 
Apart from his personal relations to the college, 
he had the true oratorical temperament, and no 
man can be an orator in the highest sense unless 
he feels intensely, for the moment at least, the 
truth and force of every word he utters. To move 
others deeply he must be deeply moved himself. 
Yet at the same time Mr. Webster's peroration, 
and, indeed, his whole speech, was a model of 
consummate art. Great lawyer as he undoubtedly 
was, he felt on this occasion that he could not rely 
on legal argument and pure reason alone. With- 
out appearing to go beyond the line of propriety, 
without indulging in a declamation unsuited to the 
place, he had to step outside of legal points and in 



THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE 89 

a freer air, where lie could use his keenest and 
strongest weapons, appeal to the court not as law- 
yers but as men subject to passion, emotion, and 
prejudice. This he did boldly, delicately, success- 
fully, and thus he won his case. 

The replies of the opposing counsel were poor 
enough after such a speech. Holmes's declama- 
tion sounded rather cheap, and Mr. Wirt, thrown 
off his balance by Mr. Webster's exposure of his 
ignorance, did but slight justice^to himself or his 
cause. March 12 the arguments were closed, and 
the next day, after a conference, the chief justice 
announced that the court could agree on nothing 
and that the cause must be continued for a year, 
until the next term. The fact probably was that 
Marshall found the judges five to two against the 
college, and that the task of bringing them into 
line was not a light one. 

In this undertaking, however, he was powerfully 
aided by the counsel and all the friends of the 
college. The old board of trustees had already 
paid much attention to public opinion. The press 
was largely Federalist, and, under the pressure of 
what was made a party question, they had espoused 
warmly the cause of the college. Letters and es- 
says had appeared, and pamphlets had been circu- 
lated, together with the arguments of the counsel 
at Exeter. This work was pushed with increased 
eagerness after the argument at Washington, and 
the object now was to create about the three doubt- 
ful judges an atmosphere of public opinion which 



90 DANIEL WEBSTER 

should imperceptibly bring them over to the col- 
lege. Johnson, Livingston, and Story were all 
men who would have started at the barest suspi- 
cion of outside influence even in the most lejriti- 
mate form of argument, which was all that was 
ever thought of or attempted. This made the 
task of the trustees very delicate and difficult in 
developing a public sentiment which should sway 
the judges without their being aware of it. The 
printed arguments of Mason, Smith, and Webster 
were carefully sent to certain of the judges, but 
not to all. All documents of a similar character 
found their way to the same quarters. The lead- 
ing Federalists were aroused everywhere, so that 
the judges might be made to feel their opinion. 
With Story, as a New England man, a Democrat 
by circumstances, a Federalist by nature, there 
was but little difficulty. A thorough review of 
the case, joined with Mr. Webster's argument, 
caused him soon to change his first impression. 
To reach Livingston and Johnson was not so easy, 
for they were out of New England, and it was 
necessary to go a long way round to get at them. 
The great legal upholder of Federalism in New 
York was Chancellor Kent. His first impression, 
like that of Story, was decidedly against the col- 
lege, but after much effort on the part of the trus- 
tees and their able allies, Kent was converted, 
partly through his reason, partly through his Fed- 
eralism, and then his powers of persuasion and 
his great influence on opinion came to bear very 



THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE 91 

directly on Livingston, more remotely on Johnson. 
The whole business was managed like a quiet, 
decorous political campaign. The press and the 
party were everywhere actively interested. At 
first, and in the early summer of 1818, before 
Kent was converted, matters looked badly for the 
trustees. Mr. Webster knew the complexion of 
the court, and hoped little from the point raised 
in Trustees v. Woodward. Still, no one de- 
spaired, and- the work was kept up until, in Sep- 
tember, President Brown wrote to Mr. Webster 
in reference to the argument : — 

"It has already been, or shortly will be, read by all 
the commanding men of New England and New York ; 
and so far as it has gone it has united them all, without 
a single exception within my knowledge, in one broad 
and impenetrable phalanx for our defense and support. 
New England and New York are gained. Will not this 
be sufficient for our present purposes ? If not, I should 
recommend reprinting. And on this point you are the 
best judge. I prevailingly think, however, that the cur- 
rent of opinion from this part of the country is setting 
so strongly towards the South that we may safely trust 
to its force alone to accomplish whatever is necessary." 

The worthy clergyman writes of public opinion 
as if the object was to elect a president. All this 
effort, however, was well applied, as was found 
when the court came together at the next term. 
In the interval the State had become sensible of 
the defects of their counsel, and had retained Mr. 
Pinkney, who stood at that time at the head of 



92 DANIEL WEBSTER 

the bar of the United States. He had all the 
qualifications of a great lawyer, except perhaps 
that of robustness. He was keen, strong, and 
learned ; diligent in preparation, he was ready and 
fluent in action, a good debater, and master of a 
high order of eloquence. He was a most for- 
midable adversary, and one whom Mr. Webster, 
then just at the outset of his career, had probably 
no desire to meet in such a doubtful case as this.^ 
Even here, however, misfortune seemed to pursue 
the State, for Mr. Pinkney was on bad terms with 
Mr. Wirt, and acted alone. He did all that was 
possible; prepared himself elaborately in the law 
and history of the case, and then went into court 

1 Mr. Peter Harvey, in his Reminiscences (p. 122), has an anec- 
dote in regard to Webster and Pinkney, which places the former 
in the light of a common and odious bully, an attitude as alien ta 
Mr. Webster's character as can well be conceived. The story is 
undoubtedly either wholly fictitious or so grossly exaggerated as 
to be practically false. In a pamphlet by the Right Reverend 
William Pinkney published in 1878, of which I did not know 
when this note was published, the Harvey story is completely 
refuted. On the page preceding the account of this incident, 
Mr. Harvey makes Webster say that he never received a chal- 
lenge from Randolph, whereas in Webster's own letter, published 
by Mr. Curtis, there is express reference to a note of challenge 
received from Randolph. This is a fair example of these Rem- 
iniscences. A more untrustworthy book it would be impossible 
to imagine. There is not a statement iu it which can be safely 
accepted, unless supported by other evidence. It puts its subject 
throughout iu the most unpleasant light, and nothing has ever 
been written about Webster so well calculated to injure and 
belittle him as these feeble and distorted recollections of his lov- 
ing and devoted Boswell. It is the reflection of a great man 
upon the mirror of a small mind and weak memory. 



THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE 93 

ready to make the wisest possible move by asking 
for a reargument. Marshall, however, was also 
quite prepared. Turning his "blind ear," as some 
one said, to Pinkney, he announced, as soon as he 
took his seat, that the judges had come to a con- 
clusion during the vacation. He then read one 
of his great opinions, in which he held that the 
college charter was a contract within the meaning 
of the Constitution, and that the acts of the New 
Hampshire legislature impaired this contract, and 
were therefore void. To this decision four judges 
assented in silence, although Story and Washing- 
ton subsequently wrote out opinions. Judge Todd 
was absent, through illness, and Judge Duvall 
dissented. The immediate effect of the decision 
was to leave the college in the hands of the victo* 
rious Federalists. In the precedent which it es- 
tablished, however, it had much deeper and more 
far-reaching results. It brought within the scope 
of the Constitution of the United States every 
charter granted by a State, limited the action of 
the States in a most important attribute of sover- 
eignty, and extended the jurisdiction of the high- 
est federal court more than any other judgment 
ever rendered by them. From the day when it 
was announced to the present time, the doctrine 
of Marshall in the Dartmouth College case has 
continued to exert an enormous influence, and has 
been constantly sustained and attacked in litiga- 
tion of the greatest importance. 

The defendant Woodward having died, Mr. 



94 DANIEL WEBSTER 

Webster moved that the judgment be entered nunC 
pro tunc. Pinkney and Wirt objected on the 
ground that the other causes on the docket con- 
tained additional facts, and that no final judgment 
should be entered until these causes had been 
heard. The court, however, granted Mr. Web- 
ster's motion. Mr. Pinkney then tried to avail 
himself of the stipulation in regard to the special 
verdict, that any new and material facts might be 
added or any facts expunged. Mr. Webster per- 
emptorily declined to permit any change, obtained 
judgment against Woodward, and obliged Mr. 
Pinkney to consent that the other causes should 
be remanded, without instructions, to the Circuit 
Court, where they were heard by Judge Story, 
who rendered a decree nisi for the college. This 
closed the case, and such were the last displays of 
Mr. Webster's dexterous and vigorous management 
of the famous "college causes." 

The popular opinion of this case seems to be 
that Mr. Webster, with the aid of Mr. Mason 
and Judge Smith, developed a great constitutional 
argument, which he forced upon the acceptance of 
the court by the power of his close and logical 
reasoning, and thus established an interpretation 
of the Constitution of vast moment. The truth 
is that the suggestion of the constitutional point, 
not a very remarkable idea in itself, originated, 
as has been said, with a layman, was regarded by 
Mr. Webster as a forlorn hope, and was very 
briefly discussed by him before the Supreme Court. 



THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE 95 

He knew, of course, that if the case were to be 
decided against Woodward, it could only be on 
the constitutional point, but he evidently thought 
that the court would not take the view of it which 
was favorable to the college. The Dartmouth 
College case was unquestionably one of Mr. Web- 
ster's great achievements at the bar, but it has 
been rightly praised on mistaken grounds. Mr. 
Webster made a very fine presentation of the ar- 
guments mainly prepared by Mason and Smith. 
He transcended the usual legal limits with a burst 
of eloquent appeal which stands high among the 
famous passages of his oratory. In what may be 
called the strategy of the case he showed the best 
generalship and the most skilKul management. 
He also proved himself to be possessed of great 
tact and to be versed in the knowledge of men, 
qualities not usually attributed to him because 
their exercise involved an amount of care and 
painstaking foreign to his indolent and royal tem- 
perament, which almost always relied on weight 
and force for victory. 

Mr. Webster no doubt improved in details, and 
made better arguments at the bar than he did 
upon this occasion, but the Dartmouth College 
case, on the whole, shows his legal talents so nearly 
at their best, and in such unusual variety, that it 
is a fit point at which to pause in order to consider 
some of his other great legal arguments and his 
position and abilities as a lawyer. For this pur- 
pose it is quite sufficient to confine ourselves to 



96 DANIEL WEBSTER 

the cases mentioned by Mr. Curtis, and to the 
legal arguments preserved in the collection of Mr. 
Webster's speeches. 

Five years after the Dartmouth College deci- 
sion, Mr. Webster made his famous argument in 
the case of Gibbons v. Ogden. The case was 
called suddenly, and Mr. Webster prepared his 
argument in a single night of intense labor. The 
facts were all before him, but he showed a readi- 
ness in arrangement only equaled by its force. 
The question was whether the State of New York 
had a right under the Constitution to grant a 
monopoly of steam navigation in its waters to 
Fulton and Livingston. Mr. Webster contended 
that the acts making such a grant were unconsti- 
tutional, because the power of Congress to regulate 
commerce was, within certain limitations, exclu- 
sive. He won his cause, and the decision, from 
its importance, probably enhanced the contempo- 
rary estimate of his effort. The argument was 
badly reported, but it shows all its author's strong- 
est qualities of close reasoning and effective state- 
ment. The point in issue was neither difficult 
nor obscure, and afforded no opportunity for a 
display of learning. It was purely a matter of 
constitutional interpretation, ° and could be dis- 
cussed chiefly in a historical manner and from the 
standpoint of public interests. This was particu- 
larly fitted to Mr. Webster's cast of mind, and he 
did his subject full justice. It was pure argument 
on general principles. Mr. Webster does not 



THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE 97 

reach that poiDt of intense clearness and condensa- 
tion which characterized Marshall and Hamilton, 
in whose writings we are fascinated by the beauty 
of the intellectual display, and are held fast by 
each succeeding line, which always comes charged 
with fresh meaning. Nevertheless, Mr. Webster 
touches a very high point in this most difficult 
form of argument, and the impressiveness of his 
manner and voice carried all that he said to its 
mark with a direct force in which he stood un- 
rivaled. 

In Ogden v, Saunders, heard in 1827, Mr. 
Webster argued that the clause prohibiting state 
laws impairing the obligation of contracts covered 
future as well as past contracts. He defended his 
difficult position with astonishing ability, but the 
court very correctly decided against him. The 
same qualities which appear in these cases are 
shown in the others of a like nature, which were 
conspicuous among the multitude with which he 
was intrusted. We find them also in cases in- 
volving purely legal questions, such as the Bank 
of the United States v. Primrose, and The Pro- 
vidence Kailroad Co. v. The City of Boston, ac- 
companied always with that ready command of 
learning which an extraordinary memory made 
easy. There seemed to be no diminution of Mr. 
Webster's great powers in this field as he ad- 
vanced in years. In the Rhode Island case and 
in the Passenger Tax cases, argued when he was 
sixty-six years old, he rose to the same high plane 



98 DANIEL WEBSTER 

of clear, impressive, effective reasoning as when he 
defended his Alma Mater. 

Two causes, however, demand more than a pass- 
ms: mention, — the Girard will case and the Rhode 
Island case. The former involved no constitutional 
points. The suit was brought to break the will 
of Stephen Girard, and the question was whether 
the bequest to found a college could be construed 
to be a charitable devise. On this question Mr. 
Webster had a weak case in point of law, but he 
readily detected a method by which he could go 
boldly outside the law, as he had done to a certain 
degree in the Dartmouth College case, and substi- 
tute for argument an eloquent and impassioned 
appeal to emotion and prejudice. Girard was a 
free-thinker, and he provided in his will that no 
priest or minister of any denomination should be 
admitted to his college. Assuming that this ex- 
cluded all religious teaching, Mr. Webster then 
laid down the proposition that no bequest or gift 
could be charitable which excluded Christian teach- 
ing. In other words, he contended that there was 
no charity except Christian charity, which, the 
poet assures us, is so rare. At this day such a 
theory would hardly be gravely propounded by 
any one. But Mr. Webster, on the ground that 
Girard 's bequest was derogatory to Christianity, 
pronounced a very fine discourse defending and 
eulogizing, with much eloquence, the Christian 
religion. The speech produced a great effect. 
One is inclined to think that it was the cause of 



THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE 99 

the court's evading the question raised by Mr. 
Webster, and sustaining the will, a result they 
were bound to reach in any event, on other grounds. 
The speech certainly produced a great sensation, 
and was much admired, especially by the clergy, 
who caused it to be printed and widely distributed. 
It did not impress lawyers quite so favorably, and 
we find Judge Story writing to Chancellor Kent 
that "Webster did his best for the other side, but 
it seems to me altogether an address to the preju- 
dices of the clergy." The subject, in certain ways, 
had a deep attraction for Mr. Webster. His im- 
agination was excited by the splendid history of 
the Church, and his conservatism was deeply stirred 
by a system which, whether in the guise of the 
Eomish hierarchy, or the Church of England, or 
in the form of powerful dissenting sects, was, as 
a whole, imposing by its age, its influence, and its 
moral grandeur. Moreover, it was one of the 
great estabHshed bulwarks of well-ordered and 
civilized society. AH this appealed strongly to 
Mr. Webster, and he made the most of his oppor- 
tunity and of his shrewdly-chosen ground. Yet 
the speech on the Girard wiU is not one of his best 
efforts. It has not the subdued but intense fire 
which glowed so splendidly in his great speeches in 
the Senate. It lacked the stately pathos which 
came always when Mr. Webster was deeply moved. 
It was delivered in 1844, and was slightly tinged 
with the pompousness which manifested itself in 
his late years, and especially on religious topics. 



100 DANIEL WEBSTER 

No man has a right to question the religious sin- 
cerity of another, unless upon evidence so full and 
clear that, in such cases, it is rarely to be found. 
There is certainly no cause for doubt in Mr. Web- 
ster's case. He was both sincere and honest in 
religion, and had a real and submissive faith. 
But he accepted his religion as one of the great 
facts and proprieties of life. He did not reach 
his religious convictions after much burning ques- 
tioning and many bitter experiences. In this he 
did not differ from most men of this age, and it 
only amounts to saying that Mr. Websiier did not 
possess a deeply religious temperament. He did 
not have the ardent proselyting spirit which is the 
surest indication of a profoundly religious nature ; 
the spirit of the Saracen emir crying, "Forward! 
Paradise is under the shadow of our swords." 
When, therefore, he turned his noble powers to a 
defense of religion, he did not speak with that 
impassioned fervor which, coming from the depths 
of a man's heart, savors of inspiration and seems 
essential to the highest religious eloquence. He 
believed thoroughly every word he uttered, but he 
did not feel it, and in things spiritual the heart 
must be enlisted as well as the head. It was wit- 
tily said of a well-known anti-slavery leader, that 
had he lived in the Middle Ages he would have 
gone to the stake for a principle, under a misap- 
prehension as to the facts. Mr. Webster not only 
could never have misapprehended facts, but, if he 
had flourished in the Middle Ages he would have 



THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE 101 

been a stanch and honest supporter of the strong- 
est government and of the dominant church. Per- 
haps this defines his religious character as well as 
anything, and explains why the argument in the 
Girard will case, fine as it was, did not reach the 
elevation and force which he so often displayed 
upon other themes. 

The Rhode Island case grew out of the troubles 
known at that period as Dorr's rebellion. It 
involved a discussion not only of the constitutional 
provisions for suppressing insurrections and secur- 
ing to every State a republican form of govern- 
ment, but also of the general history and theory 
of the American governments, both state and na- 
tional. There was thus offered to Mr. Webster 
that full scope and large field in which he de- 
lighted, and which were always peculiarly favor- 
able to his talents. His argument was purely 
constitutional, and although not so closely rea- 
soned, perhaps, as some of his earlier efforts, is, 
on the whole, as fine a specimen as we have of his 
intellectual power as a constitutional lawyer at the 
bar of the highest national tribunal. Mr. Web- 
ster did not often transcend the proper limits of 
purely legal discussion in the courts, and yet even 
when the question was wholly legal, the court- 
room would be crowded by women as well as men, 
to hear him speak. It was so at the hearing 
of the Girard suit; and during the strictly legal 
arguments in the Charles River Bridge case, the 
court-room, Judge Story says, was filled with a 



102 DANIEL WEBSTER 

brilliant audience, including many ladies, and he 
adds that "Webster's closing reply was in his best 
manner, but with a little too much Jierte here and 
there." The ability to attract such audiences gives 
an idea of the impressiveness of his manner and of 
the beauty of his voice and delivery better than 
anything else, for these qualities alone could have 
drawn the general public and held their attention 
to the cold and dry discussion of laws and consti- 
tutions. 

There is a little anecdote told by Mr. Curtis in 
connection with this Rhode Island case, which 
illustrates very weU two striking qualities in Mr. 
Webster as a lawyer. The counsel in the court 
below had been assisted by a clever young lawyer 
named Bos worth, who had elaborated a point which 
he thought very important, but which his seniors 
rejected. Mr. Bosworth was sent to Washington 
to instruct Mr. Webster as to the cause, and, after 
he had gone through the case, Mr. Webster asked 
if that was aU. Mr. Bosworth modestly replied 
that there was another view of his own which his 
seniors had rejected, and then stated it briefly. 
When he concluded, Mr. Webster started up and 
exclaimed, "Mr. Bosworth, by the blood of all the 
Bosworths who fell on Bosworth field, that is the 
point of the case. Let it be included in the brief 
by all means." This is highly characteristic of 
one of Mr. Webster's strongest attributes. lie 
always saw with an unerring glance ^'the point" 
of a case or a debate. A great surgeon will detect 



THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE 103 

the precise spot where the knife should enter when 
disease hides it from other eyes, and often with 
apparent carelessness will make the necessary in- 
cision at the exact place when a deflection of a 
hair's breadth or a tremor of the hand would bring 
death to the patient. Mr. Webster had the same 
intellectual dexterity, the mingled result of nature 
and art. As the tiger is said to have a sure in- 
stinct for the throat of his victim, so Mr. Webster 
always seized on the vital point of a question. 
Other men would debate and argi^e for days, per- 
haps, and then Mr. Webster would take up the 
matter, and grasp at once the central and essential 
element which had been there all along, pushed 
hither and thither, but which had escaped all eyes 
but his own. He had preeminently 

" The calm eye that seeks 
'Midst all the huddling silver little worth 
The one thin piece that comes, pure gold." 

The anecdote further illustrates the use which 
Mr. Webster made of the ideas of other people. 
He did not say to Mr. Bosworth, here is the true 
point of the case, but he saw that something was 
wanting, and asked the young lawyer what it was. 
The moment the proposition was stated he recog- 
nized its value and importance at a glance. He 
might and probably would have discovered it for 
himself, but his instinct was to get it from some 
one else. 

It is one of the familiar attributes of great in- 
tellectual power to be able to select subordinates 



104 DANIEL WEBSTER 

wisely; to use other people and other people's 
labor and thought to the best advantage, and to 
have as much as possible done for one by others. 
This power of assimilation Mr. Webster had to a 
marked degree. There is no depreciation in say- 
ing that he took much from others, for it is a 
capacity characteristic of the strongest minds, and 
so long as the debt is acknowledged, such a faculty 
is a subject for praise, not criticism. But when 
the recipient becomes unwilling to admit the obli- 
gation which is jio detraction to himself, and with- 
out which the giver is poor indeed, the case is 
altered. In his earliest days Mr. Webster used 
to draw on one Parker Noyes, a mousing, learned 
New Hampshire lawyer, and freely acknowledged 
the debt. In the Dartmouth College case, as has 
been seen, he over and over again gave simply and 
generously all the credit for the learning and the 
points of the brief to jMason and Smith, and yet 
the glory of the case has rested with Mr. Webster 
and always will. He gained by his frank honesty 
and did not lose a whit. But in his latter days, 
when his sense of justice had grown somewhat 
blunted and his nature was perverted by the un- 
measured adulation of the little immediate circle 
which then hung about him, he ceased to admit 
his obligations as in his earlier and better years. 
From no one did Mr. Webster receive so much 
hearty and generous advice and assistance as from 
Judge Story, whose calm judgment and wealth of 
learning were always at his disposal. They were 



given not only in questions of law, but in regard 
to the Crimes Act, tlie Judiciary Act, and the 
Ashburton treaty. After Judge Story's death, 
Mr. Webster not only declined to allow the publi- 
cation by the judge's son and biographer of Story's 
letters to himself, but he refused to permit even 
the publication of extracts from his own letters, 
intended merely to show the nature of the services 
rendered to him by Story. A cordial assent would 
have enhanced the reputation of both. The re- 
fusal is a blot on the intellectual greatness of the 
one and a source of bitterness to the descendants 
and admirers of the other. It is to be regretted 
that the extraordinary ability which Mr. Webster 
always showed in grasping and assimilating masses 
of theories and facts, and in drawing from them 
what was best, should ever have been sullied by 
a want of gratitude which, properly and freely 
rendered, would have made the lustre of his own 
fame shine still more brightly. 

A close study of Mr. Webster's legal career, in 
the light of contemporary reputation and of the 
best examples of his work, leads to certain quite 
obvious conclusions. He had not a strongly origi- 
nal or creative legal mind. This was chiefly due 
to nature, but in some measure to a dislike to the 
slow processes of investigation and inquiry, which 
were always distasteful to him, although he was 
entirely capable of intense and protracted exertion. 
He cannot, therefore, be ranked with the illustri- 
ous few, among whom we count Mansfield and 



106 DANIEL WEBSTER 

Marshall as the most brilliant examples, who not 
only declared what the law was, but who made it. 
Mr. Webster's powers were not of this class, yet, 
except in these highest and rarest qualities, he 
stands in the front rank of the lawyers of his coun- 
try and his age. Without extraordinary profun- 
dity of thought or depth of learning, he had a 
wide, sure, and ready knowledge both of principles 
and cases. Add to this quick apprehension, un- 
erring sagacity for vital and essential points, a 
perfect sense of proportion, an almost unequaled 
power of statement, backed by reasoning at once 
close and lucid, and we may fairly say that Mr. 
Webster, who possessed all these qualities, need 
fear comparison with but very few among the 
great lawyers of that period either at home or 
abroad. 



CHAPTER IV 

THE MASSACHUSETTS CONVENTION AND THE 
PLYMOUTH ORATION 

The conduct of the Dartmouth College case, and 
its result, at once raised Mr. Webster to a posi- 
tion at the bar second only to that held by Mr. 
Pinkney. He was now constantly occupied by 
most important and lucrative engagements, but in 
1820 he was called upon to take a leading part in 
a great public work which demanded the exertion 
of all his talents as statesman, lawyer, and debater. 
The lapse of time and the setting off of the Maine 
district as a State had made a convention neces- 
sary, in order to revise the Constitution of Massa- 
chusetts. This involved the direct resort to the 
people, the source of all power, which is only re- 
quired to effect a change in the fundamental law 
of the State. On these rare occasions it has been 
the honored custom in Massachusetts to lay aside 
all the qualifications attaching to ordinary legisla- 
tures and to choose the best men, without regard 
to party, public office, or domicile, for the per- 
formance of this important work. No tetter or 
abler body could have been assembled for this 
purpose than that which met in convention at 



108 DANIEL WEBSTER 

Boston in November, 1820. Among these distin- 
guished men were John Adams, then in liis eighty- 
fifth year, and one of the framers of the original 
Constitution of 1780, Chief Justice Parker, of the 
Supreme Bench, the Federal judges, and many of 
the leaders at the bar and in business. The two 
most conspicuous men in the convention, however, 
were Joseph Story and Daniel Webster, who bore 
the burden in every discussion; and there were 
three subjects, upon which Mr. Webster spoke at 
length, that deserve more than a passing allusion. 

Questions of party have, as a rule, found but 
little place in the constitutional assemblies of Mas- 
sachusetts. This was peculiarly the case in 1820, 
when the old political divisions were dying out, 
and new ones had not yet been formed. At the 
same time widely opposite views found expression 
in the convention. The movement toward thorough 
and complete democracy was gathering headway, 
and directing its force against many of the old 
colonial traditions and habits of government em- 
bodied in the existing Constitution. That portion 
of the delegates which favored certain radical 
changes was confronted and stoutly opposed by 
those who, on the whole, inclined to make as few 
alterations as possible, and desired to keep things 
about as they were. Mr. Webster, as was natural, 
was the leader of the conservative party, and his 
course ir^ this convention is an excellent illustra- 
tion of this marked trait in his disposition and 
character. 



Itli^ MAbSAU 11 U SETTS UUiN VJbiiNTiUJN lUU 

One of the important questions concerned the 
abolition of the profession of Christian faith as 
a qualification for holding office. On this point 
the line of argument pursued by ]\Ir. Webster is 
extremely characteristic. Although an unvarying 
conservative throughout his life, he was incapable 
of bigotry, or of narrow and illiberal views. At 
the same time the process by which he reached his 
opinion in favor of removing the religious test 
shows more clearly than even ultra-conservatism 
could, how free he was from any touch of the re- 
forming or innovating spirit. He did not urge 
that, on general principles, religious tests were 
wrong, that they were relics of the past and in 
hopeless conflict with the fundamental doctrines of 
American liberty and democracy. On the con- 
trary, he implied that a religious test was far from 
being of necessity an evil. He laid down the 
sound doctrine that qualifications for office were 
purely matters of expediency, and then argued 
that it was wise to remove the religious test be- 
cause, while its principle would be practically en- 
forced by a Christian community, it was offensive 
to some persons to have it engrafted on the Consti- 
tution. The speech in which he set forth these 
views was an able and convincing one, entirely 
worthy of its author, and the removal of the test 
was carried by a large majority. It is an inter- 
esting example of the combination of steady con- 
servatism and breadth of view which Mr. Webster 
always displayed. But it also brings into strong 



110 DANIEL WEBSTER 

relief his aversion to radical general principles as 
grounds of action, and his inborn hostility to far- 
reaching change. 

His two other important speeches in this con- 
vention have been preserved in his works, and are 
purely and wholly conservative in tone and spirit. 
The first related to the basis of representation in 
the Senate, whose members were then apportioned 
according to the amount of taxable property in 
the districts. This system, Mr. Webster thought, 
should be retained, and his speech was a most 
masterly discussion of the whole system of govern- 
ment by tw^o houses. He urged the necessity of 
a basis of representation for the upper house dif- 
ferent from that of the lower, in order to make 
the former fully serve its purpose of a check and 
balance to the popular branch. This important 
point he handled in the most skilKul manner, and 
there is no escape from his conclusion that a dif- 
ference of origin in the two legislative branches of 
the government is essential to the full and perfect 
operation of the system. This difference of origin, 
he argued, could be obtained only by the introduc- 
tion of property as a factor in the basis of repre- 
sentation. The weight of his speech was directed 
to defending the principle of a suitable representa- 
tion of property, which was a subject requiring 
very adroit treatment. The doctrine is one which 
probably would not be tolerated now in any part 
of this country, and even in 1820, in Massachu- 
setts, it was a delicate matter to advocate it, for it 



JLAAXJ ATA* ».K-'fcw'AJLV^ J 



was hostile to the general sentiment of the people. 
Having established his position that it was all 
important to make the upper branch a strong and 
effective check, he said that the point in issue was 
not whether property offered the best method of 
distinguishing between the two houses, but whether 
it was not better than no distinction at all. This 
being answered affirmatively, the next question to 
be considered was whether property, not in the 
sense of personal possessions and personal power, 
but in a general sense, ought not to have its due 
influence in matters of government. He main- 
tained the justice of this proposition by showing 
that our constitutions rest largely on the general 
equality of property, which, in turn, is due to our 
laws of distribution. This led him into a discus- 
sion of the principles of the distribution of prop- 
erty. He pointed out the dangers arising in Eng- 
land from the growth of a few large estates, while 
on the other hand he predicted that the rapid and 
minute subdivision of property in France would 
change the character of the government, and, far 
from strengthening the crown, as was then gener- 
ally prophesied, would have a directly opposite 
effect, by creating a large and united body of 
small proprietors, who would sooner or later con- 
trol the country. He illustrated, in this way, the 
value and importance of a general equality of 
property, and of steadiness in legislation affecting 
it. These were the reasons, he contended, for 
making property the basis of the check and bal- 



112 DANIEL WEBSTER 

ance furnished to our system of government by an 
upper house. Moreover, all property being sub- 
ject to taxation for the purpose of educating the 
children of both rich and poor, it deserved some 
representation for this valuable aid to government. 
It is impossible, in a few lines, ^ to do justice to 
Mr. Webster's argument. It exhibited a great 
deal of tact and ingenuity, especially in the dis- 
tinction so finely drawn between property as an 
element of personal power and property in a gen- 
eral sense, and so distributed as to be a bulwark 
of liberty. The speech is, on this account, an 
interesting one, for Mr. Webster was rarely ingen- 
ious, and hardly ever got over difficulties by fine- 
spun distinctions. In this instance adroitness was 
very necessary, and he did not hesitate to employ 
it. By his skillful treatment, by his illustrations 
drawn from England and France, which show the 
accuracy and range of his mental vision in matters 
of politics and public economy, both at home and 
abroad, and with the powerful support of Judge 
Story, Mr. Webster carried his point. The ele- 
ment of property representation in the Senate was 
retained, but so wholly by the ability of its advo- 
cate that it was not long afterwards removed. 

Mr. Webster's other important speech related 
to the judiciary. The Constitution provided that 
the judges, who held office during good behavior, 
should be removable by the governor on an address 

^ My brief statement is merely a further condensation of the 
excellent abstract of this speech made by Mr. Curtis. 



THE MASSACHUSETTS CONVEI^TiUiN lY^ 

from the legislature. This was considered to meet 
cases of incomi)etency or of personal misconduct, 
which could not be reached by impeachment. Mr. 
Webster desired to amend the clause so as to 
require a two thirds vote for the passage of the ad- 
dress, and that reasons should be assigned, and a 
hearing assured to the judge who was the subject 
of the proceedings. These changes were all di- 
rected to the further protection of the bench, and 
it was in this connection that Mr. Webster made 
a most admirable and effective speech on the well- 
worn but noble theme of judicial independence. 
He failed to carry conviction, however, and his 
amendments were all lost. The perils which he 
anticipated have never arisen, and the good sense 
of the people of Massachusetts has prevented the 
slightest abuse of what Mr. Webster rightly es- 
teemed a dangerous power. 

Mr. Webster's continual and active exertion 
throughout the session of this convention brought 
him great applause and admiration, and showed 
his powers in a new light. Judge Story, with 
generous enthusiasm, wrote to Mr. Mason, after 
the convention adjourned: — • 

"Our friend "Webster has gained a noble reputation. 
He was before known as a lawyer ; but he has now se- 
cured the title of an eminent and enlightened statesman. 
It was a glorious field for him, and he has had an amj)Ie 
harvest. The whole force of his great mind was brought 
out, and, in several speeches, he commanded universal 
admiration. He always led the van, and was most skill- 



114 DANIEL WEBSTER 

ful and instantaneous in attack and retreat. He fought, 
as I have told him, in the ' imminent deadly breach ; ' 
and all I could do was to skirmish, in aid of him, upon 
some of the enemy's outposts. On the whole, I never 
was more proud of any display than his in my life, and 
I am much deceived if the well-earned popularity, so 
justly and so boldly acquired by him on this occasion, 
does not carry him, if he lives, to the presidency." 

While this convention, so memorable in the 
career of Mr. Webster and so filled with the most 
absorbing labors, was in session, he achieved a 
still wider renown in a very different field. On 
the 22d of December, 1820, he delivered at Plym- 
outh the oration which commemorated the two 
hundredth anniversary of the landing of the Pil- 
grims. The theme was a splendid one, both in 
the intrinsic interest of the event itself, in the 
character of the Pilgrims, in the vast results which 
had grown from their humble beginnings, and in 
the principles of free government, which had spread 
from the cabins of the exiles over the face of a 
continent, and had become the common heritage 
of a great people. We are fortunate in having 
a description of the orator, written at the time by 
a careful observer and devoted friend, Mr. George 
Ticknor, who says : — 

" Friday Evening. — I have run away from a great 
levee there is downstairs, thronging in admiration round 
Mr. Webster, to tell you a little word about his oration. 
Yet I do not dare to trust myself about it, and I warn 
you beforehand tliat I liave not the least confidence in 



my own opinion. His manner carried me away com- 
pletely ; not, I think, that I could have been so carried 
away if it had been a poor oration, for of that, I appre- 
hend, there can be no fear. It must have been a great, 
a very great performance, but whether it was so abso- 
lutely unrivaled as I imagined when I was under the 
immediate influence of his presence, of his tones, of his 
looks, I cannot be sure till I have read it, for it seems 
to me incredible. 

" I was never so excited by public speaking before in 
my life. Three or four times I thought my temples 
would burst with the gush of blood ; for, after all, you 
must know that I am aware it is no connected and com- 
pacted whole, but a collection of wonderful fragments 
of burning eloquence, to which his whole manner gave 
tenfold force. When I came out I was almost afraid 
to come near to him. It seemed to me as if he was 
like the mount that might not be touched and that burned 
with fire. I was beside myself, and am so still." 

" Saturday. — Mr. Webster was in admirable spirits. 
On Thursday evening he was considerably agitated and 
oppressed, and yesterday morning he had not his natural 
look at all ; but since his entire success he has been as 
gay and playful as a kitten. The party came in one 
after another, and the spirits of all were kindled brighter 
and brighter, and we fairly sat up tiU after two o'clock. 
I think, therefore, we may now safely boast the Plym- 
outh expedition has gone off admirably." 

Mr. Ticknor was a man of learning and scholar- 
ship, just returned from a prolonged sojourn in 
Europe, where he had met and conversed with aU 
the most distinguished men of the day, both in 



116 DANIEL WEBSTER 

Enirlaiul and on the Continent. He was not, 
therefore, disposed by training or recent habits to 
indulge a facile enthusiasm, and such deep emotion 
as he experienced must have been due to no ordi- 
nary cause. He was, in fact, profoundly moved 
because he had been listening to one of the great 
masters of eloquence exhibiting, for the first time, 
his full powers in a branch of the art much more 
cultivated in America by distinguished men of all 
professions than is the custom elsewhere. The 
Plymouth oration belongs to what, for lack of a 
better name, we must call occasional oratory. 
This form of address, taking an anniversary, a 
great historical event or character, a celebration, 
or occasion of any sort as a starting point, permits 
either a close adherence to the original text or the 
widest latitude of treatment. The field is a broad 
and inviting one. That it promises an easy suc- 
cess is shown by the innumerable productions of 
this kind which, for many years, have been show- 
ered upon the country. That the promise is falla- 
cious is proved by the very small number among 
the countless host of such addresses which survive 
the moment of their utterance. The facility of 
saying something is counterbalanced by the diffi- 
culty of saying anything worth hearing. The 
temptation to stray and to mistake platitude for 
originality is almost always fatal. 

Mr. Webster was better fitted than any man 
who has ever lived in this country for the perilous 
task of occasional oratory. The freedom of move- 



meiit which renders most speeches of this class 
diluted and commonplace was exactly what he 
needed. He required abundant intellectual room 
for a proper display of his powers, and he had the 
rare quality of being able to range over vast spaces 
of time and thought without becoming attenuated 
in what he said. Soaring easily, with a powerful 
sweep he returned again to earth without jar or 
shock. He had dignity and grandeur of thought, 
expression, and manner, and a great subject never 
became small by his treatment of it. He had, 
too, a fine historical imagination, and could breathe 
life and passion into the dead events of the past. 

Mr. Ticknor speaks of the Plymouth oration as 
impressing him as a series of eloquent fragments. 
The impression was perfectly correct. Mr. Web- 
ster touched on the historical event, on the charac- 
ter of the Pilgrims, on the growth and future of 
the country, on liberty and constitutional princi- 
ples, on education, and on human slavery. This 
was entirely proper to such an address. The diffi- 
culty lay in doing it well, and Mr. Webster did 
it as perfectly as it ever has been done. The 
thoughts were fine, and were expressed in simple 
and beautiful words. The delivery was grand 
and impressive, and the presentation of each suc- 
cessive theme glowed with subdued fire. There 
was no straining after mere rhetorical effect, but 
an artistic treatment of a succession of gi-eat sub- 
jects in a general and yet vivid and picturesque 
fashion. The emotion produced by the Plymouth 



118 DANIEL WEBSTER 

oration was akin to that of listening to the strains 
o£ music issuing from a full-toned organ. Those 
who heard it did not seek to gratify their reason 
or look for conviction to be brought to their un- 
derstanding. It did not appeal to the logical fac- 
ulties or to the passions, which are roused by the 
keen contests of parliamentary debate. It was the 
divine gift of speech, the greatest instrument given 
to man, used with surpassing talent, and the joy 
and pleasure which it brought were those which 
come from listening to the song of a great smger, 
or looking upon the picture of a great artist. 

The Plymouth oration, which was at once printed 
and published, was received with a universal burst 
of applause. It had more literary success than 
anything which had at that time appeared, except 
from the pen of Washington Irving. The public, 
without stopping to analyze their own feelings, or 
the oration itseK, recognized at once that a new 
genius had come before them, a man endowed with 
the noble gift of eloquence, and capable by the 
exercise of his talents of moving and inspiring 
great masses of his fellow men. Mr. Webster was 
then of an age to feel fully the glow of a great 
success, both at the moment and when the cooler 
and more critical approbation came. He was fresh 
and young, a strong man rejoicing to run the race. 
Mr. Ticknor says, in speaking of the oration : — 

" The passage at the end, where, spreading his arms 
as if to embrace them, he welcomed future generations 
to the great inheritance wliich we have enjoyed, was 



spoken with the most attractive sweetness and that pe- 
culiar smile which in him was always so charming. The 
effect of the whole was very great. As soon as he got 
home to our lodgings, all the principal people then in 
Plymouth crowded about him. He was full of anima- 
tion, and radiant with happiness. But there was some- 
thing about him very grand and imposing at the same 
time. I never saw him at any time when he seemed to 
me to be more conscious of his own powers, or to have 
a more true and natural enjoyment from their posses- 
sion. 

Amid all the applause and glory, there was one 
letter of congratulation and acknowledgment which 
must have given Mr. Webster more pleasure than 
anything else. It came from John Adams, who 
never did anything by halves. Whether he praised 
or condemned, he did it heartily and ardently, and 
such an oration on New England went straight to 
the heart of the eager, warm-blooded old patriot. 
His commendation, too, was worth having, for he 
spoke as one having authority. John Adams had 
been one of the eloquent men and the most forcible 
debater of the first Congress. He had listened to 
the great orators of other lands. He had heard 
Pitt and Fox, Burke and Sheridan, and had been 
present at the trial of Warren Hastings. His un- 
stinted praise meant and still means a great deal, 
and it concludes with one of the finest and most 
graceful of compliments. The oration, he says, 

" is the effort of a great mind richly stored with every 
species of information. If there be an American who 



120 DANIEL WEBSTER 

can read it without tears, I am not that American. It 
enters more perfectly into the genuine spirit of New 
England than any production I ever read. The obser- 
vations on the Greeks and Romans ; on colonization in 
general ; on the West India islands ; on the past, pre- 
sent, and future of America, and on the slave trade, are 
sagacious, profound, and affecting in a high degree." 

" Mr. Burke is no longer entitled to the praise — the 
most consummate orator of modern times." 

" What can I say of what regards myself ? To my 
humble name, Exegisti monumeiitum cere perennms." 

Many persons consider the Plymouth oration 
to be the finest of all Mr. Webster's efforts in 
this field. It is certainly one of the very best of 
his productions, but he showed on the next great 
occasion a distinct improvement, which he long 
maintained. Five 3'ears after the oration at Plym- 
outh, he delivered the address on the laying of the 
corner-stone of Bunker Hill monument. The su- 
periority to the first oration was not in essentials, 
but in details, the fruit of a ripening and expand- 
ing mind. At Bunker Hill, as at Plymouth, he 
displayed the massiveness of thought, the dignity 
and grandeur of expression, and the range of vision 
which are all so characteristic of his intellect and 
which were so much enhanced by his wonderful 
physical attributes. But in the later oration there 
is a greater finish and smoothness. We appre- 
ciate the fact that the Plymouth oration is a suc- 
cession of eloquent fragments ; the same is true of 
the Bunker Hill address, but we no longer realize 



it. The eontliuiity is, in appearance, unbroken, 
and the whole work is rounded and polished. The 
style, too, is now perfected. It is at once plain, 
direct, massive, and vivid. The sentences are 
generally short and always clear, hut never mo- 
notonous. The preference for Anglo-Saxon words 
and the exclusion of Latin derivatives are marked, 
and we find here in rare perfection that highest 
attribute of style, the union of simplicity, pictur- 
esqueness, and force. 

In the first Bunker Hill oration Mr. Webster 
touched his highest point in the difficult task of 
commemorative oratory. In that field he not only 
stands unrivaled, but no one has approached him. 
The innumerable productions of this class by other 
men, many of a high degree of excellence, are for- 
gotten, while those of Webster form part of the 
education of every American schoolboy, are widely 
read, and have entered into the literature and 
thought of the country. The orations of Pljanouth 
and Bunker Hill are grouped in Webster's works 
with a number of other speeches professedly of the 
same kind. But only a very few of these are 
strictly occasional; the great majority are chiefly, 
if not wholly, political speeches, containing merely 
passages here and there in the same vein as his 
great commemorative addresses. Before finally 
leaving the subject, however, it will be well to 
glance for a moment at the few orations which 
properly belong to the same class as the first two 
which we have been considering. 



122 DANIEL WEBSTER 

The Bunker Hill oration, after the lapse of only 
a year, was followed by the celebrated eulogy upon 
Adams and Jefferson. This usually and with jus- 
tice is ranked in merit with its two immediate pre- 
decessors. As a whole it is not, perhaps, quite 
so nmch admired, but it contains the famous imagi- 
nary speech of John Adams, which is the best 
known and most hackneyed passage in any of these 
orations. The opening lines, "Sink or swim, live 
or die, survive or perish, I give my hand and my 
heart to this vote," since Mr. Webster first pro- 
nounced them in Faneuil Hall, have risen even to 
the dignity of a familiar quotation. The passage, 
indeed, is perhaps the best example we have of 
the power of Mr. Webster's historical imagination. 
He had some fragmentary sentences, the character 
of the man, the nature of the debate, and the cir- 
cumstances of the time to build upon, and from 
these materials he constructed a speech which was 
absolutely startling in its life-like force. The 
revolutionary Congress, on the verge of the tre- 
mendous step which was to separate them from 
Endand, rises before us as we read the burning 
words which the imagination of the speaker put 
into the mouth of John Adams. They are not 
only instinct with life, but with the life of impend- 
ing revolution, and they glow with the warmth and 
strength of feeling so characteristic of their sup- 
posed author. It is well known that the general 
belief at the time was that the passage was an 
extract from a speech actually delivered by John 



THE MASSACHUSETTS CONVENTION 123 

Adams. Mr. Webster, as well as Mr. Adams's 
son and grandson, received numerous letters of 
inquiry on this point, and it is possible that many- 
people still persist in this belief as to the origin 
of the passage. Such an effect was not produced 
by mere clever imitation, for there was nothing 
to imitate, but by the force of a powerful historic 
imagination and a strong artistic sense in its man- 
agement. 

In 1828 Mr. Webster delivered an address be- 
fore the Mechanics' Institute in Boston, on "Sci- 
ence in connection with the Mechanic Arts," a 
subject which was outside of his usual lines of 
thought, and offered no especial attractions to him. 
This oration is graceful and strong, and possesses 
sufficient and appropriate eloquence. It is chiefly 
interesting, however, from the reserve and self- 
control, dictated by a nice sense of fitness, which 
it exhibited. Omniscience was not Mr. Webster's 
foible. He never was guilty of Lord Brougham's 
weakness of seeking to prove himself master of 
universal knowledge. In delivering an address 
on science and invention, there was a strong temp- 
tation to an orator like Mr. Webster to substitute 
glittering rhetoric for real knowledge; but the 
address at the Mechanics' Institute is simply the 
speech of a very eloquent and a liberally educated 
man upon a subject with which he had only the 
most general acquaintance. 

The other orations of this class were those on 
"The Character of Washington," the second Bun- 



124 DANIEL WEBSTER 

ker Hill luMress, "The Landing at Plymouth," 
delivered in New York at the dinner of the Pil<^rim 
Society, the remarks on the death of Judge Story 
and of Mr. Mason, and finally the speech on lay- 
ing the corner-stone for the addition to the Capi- 
tol, in 1851. These were all comparatively brief 
speeches, with the exception of that at Bunker 
Hill, which, although very fine, was perceptibly 
inferior to his first effort when the corner-stone of 
the monument was laid. The address on the char- 
acter of Washington, to an American the most 
dangerous of great and well-worn topics, is of a 
liigh order of eloquence. The theme appealed to 
Mr. Webster strongly and brought out his best 
powers, which were peculiarly fitted to do justice 
to the noble, massive, and dignified character of 
the subject. The last of these addresses, that on 
the addition to the Capitol, was in a prophetic 
vein, and, while it shows but little dhninution of 
strength, has a sadness even in its splendid antici- 
pations of the future, which makes it one of the 
most impressive of its class. All those which have 
been mentioned, however, show the hand of the 
master and are worthy to be preserved in the vol- 
umes which contain the noble series that began in 
the early flush of genius with the brilliant oration 
in the Plymouth church, and closed with the words 
uttered at Washington, under the shadow of the 
Capitol, when the light of life was fading and the 
end of all things was at hand. 



CHAPTER V 

RETURN TO CONGRESS 

The thorough knowledge of the principles of 
government and legislation, the practical states- 
manship, and the capacity for debate shown in the 
state convention, combined with the splendid ora- 
tion at Plymouth to make Mr. Webster the most 
conspicuous man in New England, with the single 
exception of John Quincy Adams. There was, 
therefore, a strong and general desire that he 
should return to public life. He accepted with 
some reluctance the nomination to Congress from 
the Boston district in 1822, and in December, 
1823, took his seat. 

The six years which had elapsed since Mr. 
Webster left Washington had been a period of 
political quiet. The old parties had ceased to 
represent any distinctive principles, and the Fed- 
eralists scarcely existed as an organization. Mr. 
Webster, during this interval, had remained al- 
most wholly quiescent in regard to public affairs. 
He had urj^ed the visit of Mr. Monroe to the 
North, which had done so much to hasten the in- 
evitable dissolution of parties. He had received 
Mr. Calhoun when that gentleman visited Boston, 



126 DANIEL WEBSTER 

and their friendship and apparent intimacy were 
such that the South Carolinian was thought to be 
his host's candidate for the presidency. Except 
for this and the part which he took in the Boston 
opposition to the Missouri Compromise and to the 
tariff, matters to be noticed in connection with 
later events, Mr. Webster had held aloof from 
political conflict. 

When he returned to Washington in 1823, the 
situation was much altered from that which he 
had left in 1817. In reality there were no parties, 
or only one ; but the all-powerful Kepublicans who 
had adopted, under the pressure of foreign war, 
most of the Federalist principles so obnoxious to 
Jefferson and his school, were split up into as 
many factions as there were candidates for the 
presidency. It was a period of transition in which 
personal politics had taken the place of those 
founded on opposing principles, and this "era of 
good feeling " was marked by the intense bitterness 
of the conflicts produced by these personal rival- 
ries. In addition to the factions which were bat- 
tling for the control of the Republican party and 
for the great prize of the presidency, there was 
still another faction, composed of the old Federal- 
ists, who, although without organization, still held 
to their name and their prejudices, and clung to- 
gether more as a matter of habit than with any 
practical object. Mr. Webster had been one of 
the Federalist leaders in the old days, and when 
he returned to public life with all the distinction 



RETURN TO CONGRESS 127 

which he had won in other fields, he was at once 
recog-nized as the chief and head of all that now 
remained of the great party of Washington and 
Hamilton. No Federalist could hope to be presi- 
dent, and for this very reason Federalist support 
was eagerly sought by all Republican candidates 
for the presidency. The favor of Mr. Webster as 
the head of an independent and necessarily disin- 
terested faction was, of course, strongly desired in 
many quarters. His political position and his 
high reputation as a lawyer, orator, and statesman 
made him, therefore, a character of the first im- 
portance in Washington, a fact to which Mr. Clay 
at once gave public recognition by placing his fu- 
ture rival at the head of the Judiciary Committee 
of the House. 

The six years of congressional life which now 
ensued were among the most useful if not the most 
brilliant in Mr. Webster's whole public career. 
He was free from the annoyance of opposition at 
home, and was twice returned by a practically 
unanimous popular vote. He held a commanding 
and influential and at the same time a thoroughly 
independent position in Washington, where he was 
regarded as the first man on the floor of the House 
in point of ability and reputation. He was not 
only able to show his great capacity for practical 
legislation, but he was at liberty to advance his 
own views on public questions in his own way, 
unburdened by the outside influences of party and 
of association which had affected him so much in 



128 DANIEL WEBSTER 

his previous term of service and were soon to re- 
assert their sway in all his subsequent career. 

His return to Congress was at once signalized 
by a great speech, which, although of no practical 
or immediate moment, deserves careful attention 
from the light which it throws on the workings of 
his mind and the development of his opinions in 
regard to his country. The House had been in 
session but a few days when Mr. Webster offered 
a resolution in favor of providing by law for the 
expenses incident to the appointment of a commis- 
sioner to Greece, should the President deem such 
an appointment expedient. The Greeks were then 
in the throes of revolution, and the sympathy for 
the heirs of so much glory in their struggle for 
freedom was strong among the American people. 
When Mr. Webster rose on eJanuary 19, 1824, to 
move the adoption of the resolution which he had 
laid upon the table of the House, the chamber was 
crowded and the galleries were filled by a large 
and fashionable audience attracted by the repu- 
tation of the orator and the interest felt in his 
subject. His hearers were disappointed if they 
expected a great rhetorical display, for which the 
nature of the subject and the classic memories 
clustering about it offered such strong temptations. 
Mr. Webster did not rise for that purpose, nor to 
make capital by an appeal to a temporary popular 
interest. His speech was for a wholly different 
purpose. It was the first expression of that grand 
conception of the American Union which had 



RETURN TO CONGRESS 129 

vaguely excited his youthful enthusiasm. Tliis 
conception had now come to be part of his intellec- 
tual being, and then and always stirred his imagi- 
nation and his affections to their inmost depths. 
It embodied the princii)le from which he never 
swerved, and led to all that he represents and to 
all that his influence means in our history. 

As the first expression of his conception of the 
destiny of the United States as a great and united 
nation, Mr. Webster was, naturally, "more fond 
of this child " than of any other of his intellectual 
family. The speech itself was a noble one, but it 
was an eloquent essay rather than a great example 
of the oratory of debate. This description can in 
no other case be applied to Mr. Webster's parlia- 
mentary efforts, but in this instance it is correct, 
because the occasion justified such a form. Mr. 
Webster's purpose was to show that, though the 
true policy of the United States absolutely de- 
barred them from taking any part in the affairs of 
Europe, yet they had an important duty to per- 
form in exercising their proper influence on the 
public opinion of the world. Europe was then 
struggling with the monstrous principles of the 
"Holy Alliance." Those principles Mr. Webster 
reviewed historically. He showed their pernicious 
tendency, their hostility to all modern theories of 
government, and their especial opposition to the 
principles of American liberty. If the doctrines 
of the Congress of Laybach were right and could 
be made to prevail, then those of America were 



130 DANIEL WEBSTER 

wrong and the systems of popular government 
adopted in the United States were doomed. Against 
such infamous principles it behooved the people of 
the United States to raise their voice. Mr. Web- 
ster sketched the history of Greece, and made a 
fine appeal to Americans to give an expression of 
their sympathy to a people struggling for freedom. 
He proclaimed, so that all men might hear, the 
true duty of the United States toward the op- 
pressed of any land, and the responsibility which 
they held to exert their influence upon the opinions 
of mankind. The national destiny of his country 
in regard to other nations was his theme ; to give 
to the glittering declaration of Canning, that he 
would "call in the new world to redress the bal- 
ance of the old," a deep and real significance was 
his object. 

The speech touched Mr. Clay to the quick. He 
supported Mr. Webster's resolution with all the 
ardor of his generous nature, and supplemented it 
by another against the interference of Spain in 
South America. A stormy debate followed, vivi- 
fied by the flings and taunts of John Randolph, 
but the unwillingness to take action was so great 
that Mr. Webster did not press his resolution to 
a vote. He had at the outset looked for a practi- 
cal result from his resolution, and had desired the 
appointment of Mr. Everett as commissioner, a 
plan in which he had been encouraged by Mr. 
Calhoun, who had given him to understand that 
the executive regarded the Greek mission with 



RETURN TO CONGRESS 131 

favor. Before he delivered his speech he became 
aware that Calhoun had misled him, that Mr. 
Adams, the secretary of state, considered Everett 
too much of a partisan, and that the administra- 
tion was wholly averse to any action in the pre- 
mises. This destroyed all hope of a practical re- 
sult, and made an adverse vote certain. The only 
course was to avoid a decision and trust to what 
he said for an effect on public opinion. The real 
purpose of the speech, however, was achieved. 
Mr. Webster had exposed and denounced the Holy 
Alliance as hostile to the liberties of mankind, 
and had declared the unalterable enmity of the 
United States to its reactionary doctrines. " The 
speech was widely read, not only wherever English 
was spoken, but it was translated into all the lan- 
guages of Europe, and was circulated throughout 
South America. It increased Mr. Webster's fame 
at home and laid the foundation of his reputation 
abroad. Above all, it stamped him as a statesman 
of a broad and national cast of mind. 

He now settled down to hard and continuous 
labor at the routine business of the House, and it 
was not until the end of March that he had occa- 
sion to make another elaborate and important 
speech. At that time Mr. Clay took up the bill 
for laying certain protective duties and advocated 
it strenuously as part of a general and steady pol- 
icy which he then christened with the name of 
"the American system." Against this bill, known 
as the tariff of 1824, Mr. Webster made, as Mr. 



132 DANIEL WEBSTER 

Adams wrote in his diary at the time, "an able 
and powerful speech," which can be more properly 
considered when we come to his change of position 
on this question a few years later. 

As chairman of the Judiciary Committee, the 
affairs of the national courts were his particular 
care. Western expansion demanded an increased 
nimiber of judges for the circuits, but, unfortu- 
nately, decisions in certain recent cases had of- 
fended the sensibilities of Virginia and Kentucky, 
and there was a renewal of the old Jeffersonian 
efforts to limit the authority of the Supreme Court. 
Instead of being able to improve, he was obliged 
to defend the court, and this he did successfully, 
defeating all attempts to curtail its power by alter- 
ations of the act of 1789. These duties and that 
of investigating the charges brought by Ninian 
Edwards against Mr. Crawford, the secretary of 
the treasury, made tlie session an unusually labori- 
ous one, and detained Mr. Webster in Washing- 
ton until midsummer. 

The short session of the next winter was of 
course marked by the excitement attendant upon 
the settlement of the presidential election which 
resulted in the choice of Mr. John Quincy Adams 
by the House of Representatives. The intense 
agitation in political circles did not, however, pre- 
vent Mr. Webster from delivering one very impor- 
tant speech, nor from carrying through successfully 
one of the most important and practically useful 
measures of his legislative career. The speech was 



RETURN TO CONGRESS 133 

delivered in tlie debate on the bill for continuing 
the national Cumberland road. Mr. Webster had 
already, many years before, defined his position 
on the constitutional question involved in internal 
improvements. He now, in response to Mr. Mc- 
Duffie of South Carolina, who denounced the mea- 
sure as partial and sectional, not merely defended 
the principle of internal improvements, but de- 
clared that it was a policy to be pursued only with 
the purest national feeling. It was not the busi- 
ness of Congress, he said, to legislate for this 
State or that, or to balance local interests, and 
because they helped one region to help another, 
but to act for the benefit of all the States united, 
and in making improvements to be guided only by. 
their necessity. He showed that these roads would 
open up the West to settlement, and incidentally 
defended the policy of selling the public lands at 
a low price as an encouragement to emigration, 
telling his Southern friends very plainly that they 
could not expect to coerce the course of population 
in favor of their own section. The whole speech 
was conceived in the broadest and wisest spirit, 
and marks another step in the development of Mr. 
Webster as a national statesman. It increased 
his reputation, and brought to him a great acces- 
sion of popularity in the West. 

The measure which he carried through was the 
famous "Crimes Act," perhaps the best monument 
that there is of his legislative and constructive 
ability. The criminal law of the United States 



134 DANIEL WEBSTER 

had scarcely been touched since the days of the 
first Congress, and was very defective and unsatis- 
factory. Mr. Webster's first task, in which he 
received most essential and valuable though unac- 
knowledged assistance from Judge Story, was to 
codify and digest the whole body of criminal law. 
This done, the hardly less difficult undertaking 
followed of carrying the measure through Con- 
gress. In the latter, Mr. Webster, by his skill in 
debate and familiarity with his subject, and by his 
influence in the House, was perfectly successful. 
That he and Judge Story did their work well in 
perfecting the bill is shown by the admirable 
manner in which the Act stood the test of time 
and experience. 

When the new Congress came together in 1825, 
Mr. Webster at once turned his attention to the 
improvement of the judiciary, which he had been 
obliged to post]^one in order to ward off the attacks 
upon the court. After much deliberation and 
thought, aided by Judge Story, and having made 
some concessions to his committee, he brought in 
a bill increasing the Supreme Court judges to ten, 
making ten instead of seven circuits, and provid- 
ing that six judges should constitute a quorum for 
the transaction of business. Although not a party 
question, the measure excited much opposition, 
and was more than a month in passing through the 
House. Mr. Webster supported it at every stage 
with great ability, and his two most important 
speeches, which are in their way models for the 



RETURN TO CONGRESS 135 

treatment of such a subject, are preserved in his 
works. The bill was carried by his great strength 
in debate and by weight of forcible argument. 
But in the Senate, where it was deprived of the 
guardianship of its author, it hung along in un- 
certainty, and was finally lost through the apathy 
or opposition of those very Western members for 
whose benefit it had been devised. Mr. Webster 
took its ultimate defeat very coolly. The Eastern 
States did not require it, and were perfectly con- 
tented with the existing arrangements, and he was 
entirely satisfied with the assurance that the best 
lawyers and wisest men approved the principles 
of the bill. The time and thought which he had 
expended were not wasted so far as he was per- 
sonally concerned, for they served to enhance his 
influence and reputation both as a lawyer and 
statesman. 

This session brought with it also occasions for 
debate other than those which were offered by 
measures of purely legislative and practical inter- 
est. The administration of Mr. Adams marks the 
close of the "era of good feeling," as it was called, 
and sowed the germs of those divisions which were 
soon to result in new and definite party combina- 
tions. Mr. Adams and Mr. Clay represented the 
conservative and General Jackson and his friends 
the radical or democratic elements in the now all- 
embracing Republican party. It was inevitable 
that Mr. Webster should sympathize with the 
former, and it was equally inevitable that in doing 



136 DANIEL WEBSTER 

so he should become the leader of the administra- 
tion forces in the House, where "his great and 
commanding influence," to quote the words of an 
opponent, made him a host himself. The desire 
of Mr. Adams to send representatives to the Pan- 
ama Congress, a scheme which lay ver}^ near his 
heart and to which Mr. Clay was equally attached, 
encountered a bitter and factious resistance in the 
Senate, sufficient to deprive the measure of any 
real utility by delaying its passage. In the House 
a resolution was introduced declaring simply that 
it was expedient to appropriate money to defray 
the expenses of the proposed mission. The oppo- 
sition at once undertook by amendments to instruct 
the ministers, and generally to go beyond the 
powers of the House. The real ground of the 
attack was slavery, threatened, as was supposed, 
by the attitude of the South American republics 
— a fact which no one understood or cared to 
recoofnize. Mr. Webster stood forth as the cham- 
pion of the executive. In an elaborate speech of 
great ability he denounced the unconstitutional 
attempt to interfere with the prerogative of the 
President, and discussed with much effect the 
treaty -making power assailed on another famous 
occasion, many years before, by the South, and 
defended at that time also by the eloquence of a 
representative of Massachusetts. Mr. Webster 
showed the nature of the Panama Congress, de- 
fended its objects and the policy of the administra- 
tion, and made a full and fine exposition of the 



RETURN TO CONGRESS 137 

intent of the ''Monroe doctrine." The speecli 
was an inii)ortant and effective one. It exliibited 
in an exeej)tIonal way Mr. Webster's eapaeity for 
discussin<^ lai-oe questions of public and constitu- 
tional law and foreign ])olicy, and was of essential 
service to the cause which he es])oused. It was 
ind)ued, too, with that sentiment of national unity 
which occupied a larger space in his thoughts with 
each succeeding year, until it finally pervaded his 
whole career as a ])ublic man. 

At the second session of the same ConsTress, 
after a vain effort to confer ui)on the country the 
benefit of a national bankrui)t law, Mr. Webster 
was again called ui)on to defend the executive in 
a much more heated conflict tlian that aroused by 
the Panama resolution. Geor"ia was enaaiJfed in 
opin-essing and robbing the Creek Indians, in open 
contempt of the treaties and obligations of the 
United States. ]\lr. Adams sent in a messajre 
reciting the facts and hinting pretty plainly that 
he intended to carry out the laws by force unless 
Georgia desisted. The message was received with 
great wrath by the Southern members. Tliey ob- 
jected to any reference to a committee, and Mr. 
Forsyth of Georgia declared the whole business to 
be "base and infamous," while a gentleman from 
Mississippi announced that Georgia would act as 
she ])I('ased. Mr. Webster, having said tl.at she 
would do so at her peril, was savagely attacked as 
the organ of the administration, daring to menace 
and insult a sovereiirn State;. This stirred Mr. 



138 DANIEL WEBSTER 

AVebster, although slow to anger, to a determina- 
tion to carry through the reference at all hazards. 
He said : — 

" He would tell the gentleman from Georgia that if 
tliere were rights of the Indians which the United 
States were bound to protect, that there were those in 
the House and in the country who would take their 
part. If we have bound ourselves by any treaty to do 
certain things, we must fulfill such obhgation. High 
words will not terrify us, loud declamation will not deter 
us from the discharge of that duty. In my own course 
in this matter I shall not be dictated to by any State or 
the representative of any State on this floor. I shall 
not be frightened from my purpose, nor will I suffer 
harsh language to produce any reaction on my mind. I 
will examine with great and e(|ual care all the rights of 
both parties. ... I have made these few remarks to 
give the gentleman from Georgia to understand that it 
was not by bold denunciation nor by bold assumption 
that the members of this House are to be influenced in 
the decision of high public concerns." 

When Mr. Webster was thoroughly roused and 
indignant there was a darkness in his face and a 
gleam of dusky light in his deep-set eyes which 
were not altogether pleasant to contemplate. How 
well Mr. Forsyth and his friends bore the words 
and look of Mr. Webster we have no means of 
knowing, but the message was referred to a select 
committee without a division. The interest to us 
in all this is the spirit in which Mr. Webster 
spoke. He loved the Union as intensely then as 



RETURN TO CONGRESS 139 

at any period of his life, but he was still far dis- 
tant from the frame of mind which induced him 
to think that his devotion to the Union would be 
best expressed and the cause of the Union best 
served by mildness toward the South and rebuke 
to the North. He believed in 1826 that dignified 
courage and firm language were the surest means 
of keeping the peace. He was quite right then, 
and he would have been always right if he had 
adhered to the plain words and determined manner 
to which he treated Mr. Forsyth and his followers. 
This session was crowded with work of varying 
importance, but the close of Mr. Webster's career 
in the lower house was near at hand. The failing 
health of Mr. E. H. Mills made it certain that 
Massachusetts would soon have a vacant seat in 
the Senate, and every one turned to Mr. Webster 
as the person above all others entitled to this high 
office. He himself was by no means so quick 
in determining to accept the position. He would 
not even think of it until the impossibility of 
Mr. Mills's return was assured, and then he had to 
meet the opposition of the administration and all 
its friends, who regarded with alarm the prospect 
of losing such a tower of strength in the House. 
Mr. Webster, indeed, felt that he could render 
the best service in the lower branch, and urged 
the senatorship upon Governor Lincoln, who was 
elected, but declined. After this there seemed 
to be no escape from a manifest destiny. Despite 
the opposition of his friends in Washington, and 



140 DANIEL VVKIiSTKK 

liis own leluctaiK'c, lie fiiKilly accepted the office 
of United States senator, wliieli was conferred 
upon liini l^)y the legislature of Massachusetts in 
June, 1827. 

In trachig the labors of Mr. Webster (hiring 
three years s])ent in the lower house, no alhision 
has been made to the purely i)()litical side of his 
career at this time, nor to his relations with the 
public men of the day. The period was important, 
generally speaking, be(^ause it showed the first 
signs of the development of new parties, and to 
Mr. Webster in particular, because it brought liim 
gradually toward the political and party i)osition 
which he was to occupy during the rest of his life. 
When he took his seat in (congress, in the autunm 
of 182iJ, the intrigucvs for the presidential succes- 
sion were at their height. Mr. Webster was then 
strongly inclined to Mr. Calhoun, as was sus])ected 
at the time of that gentleman's visit to Boston. 
lie soon became convinced, however, that Mr. 
Calhoun's chances of success were slight, and his 
good opinion of the distinguished South Carolinian 
seems also to have declined. It was out of the 
question for a man of Mr. Webster's temperament 
and habits of thought, to think for a moment of 
su])porting Jackscm, a candidate on the ground of 
military glory and unreflecting popular enthusiasm. 
Mr. Adams, as tlu^ re])resentative of New Kng- 
land, and as a conservative and trained statesman, 
was the natural and proper candidate to receive 
the aid of Mr. Webster. But here party feelings 



and traditions stepped in. The Federalists of New 
England had hated Mr. Adams with the peculiar 
bitterness which always grows out of domestic, 
quarrels, whether in })ublic or private life; and 
althouii'h the old strife had sunk a little out of 
sight, it had never been healed. The Federalist 
leaders in Massachusetts still disliked and dis- 
trusted Mr. Adams with an intensity none the less 
real because it was concealed. In the nature of 
things Mr. Webster now occupied a position of 
political independence; but he had been a steady 
party man when his party was in existence, and 
he was still a party man so far as the old Federal- 
ist feelings retained vitality and force. Pie had, 
moreover, but a slight personal acquaintance with 
Mr. Adams and no very cordial feeling toward 
him. This disposed of three presidential candi- 
dates. The fourth was Mr. Clay, and it is not 
very clear why Mr. Webster refused an alliance 
in this quarter. Mr. Clay had treated him with 
consideration, they were personal friends, their 
opinions were not dissimilar and were becoming 
constantly more alike. Possibly there was an in- 
stinctive feeling of rivalry on this very account. 
At all events, Mr. Webster would not support 
Clay. Only one candidate remained : Mr. Craw- 
ford, the representative of all that was extreme 
among the Republicans, and, in a party sense, 
most odious to the Federalists. But it was a time 
when personal factions flourished rankly in the 
absence of broad differences of principle. Mr. 



Crawford was bidding furiously for support in 
every and any quarter, and to Mr. Crawford, ac- 
cordingly, Mr. Webster began to look as a possi- 
ble leader for himself and his friends. Just how 
far Mr. Webster went in this direction cannot be 
readily or surely determined, although we get some 
light on the subject from an attack made on Mr. 
Crawford just at this time. Ninian Edwards, 
recently senator from Illinois, had a quarrel with 
Mr. Crawford, and sent in a memorial to Congress 
containing charges against the secretary of the 
treasury which were designed to break him down 
as a candidate for the presidency. Of the merits 
of this quarrel it is not very easy to judge, even if 
it were important. The character of Edwards was 
none of the best, and Mr. Crawford had unques- 
tionably made a highly unscrupulous use, politi- 
cally, of his position. The members of the ad- 
ministration, although they had no great love for 
Edwards, who had been appointed minister to 
Mexico, were distinctly hostile to Mr. Crawford, 
and refused to attend a dinner from which Ed- 
wards had been expressly excluded. Mr. Web- 
ster's part in the affair came from his being on 
the committee charged with the investigation of 
the Edwards memorial. Mr. Adams, who was of 
course excited by the presidential contest, disposed 
to regard his rivals with extreme disfavor, and 
esjiecially and justly suspicious of Mr. Crawford, 
speaks of Mr. Webster's conduct in the matter 
with the utmost bitterness. He refers to it again 



and again as an attempt to screen Crawford and 
break down Edwards, and denounces Mr. Webster 
as false, insidious, and treacherous. Much of this 
may be credited to the heated animosities of the 
moment, but there can be no doubt that iVIr. 
Webster took the matter into his own hands in 
the committee, and made every effort to protect 
Mr. Crawford, in whose favor he also spoke in the 
House. It is likewise certain that there was an 
attempt to bring about an alliance between Craw- 
ford and the Federalists of the North and East. 
The effort was abortive, and even before the con- 
clusion of the Edwards business Mr. Webster 
avowed that he should take but little part in the 
election, and that his only purpose was to secure 
the best terms possible for the Federalists, and 
obtain recognition for them from the next admin- 
istration. At that time he wished Mr. Mason to 
be attorney-general, and had already turned his 
thoughts toward the English mission for himself. 

To this waiting policy he adhered, but when 
the popular election was over, and the final deci- 
sion had been thrown into the House of Repre- 
sentatives, more definite action became necessary. 
From the questions which he put to his brother 
and others as to the course which he ought to pur- 
sue in the election by the House, it is obvious that 
he was far from anxious to secure the choice of 
Mr. Adams, and was weighing carefully other 
contingencies. The feeling of New England could 
not, however, be mistaken. Public opinion there 



demanded that the members of the House should 
stand by the New England candidate to the last. 
To this sentiment Mr. Webster submitted, and 
soon afterwards took occasion to have an interview 
with ^Ir. Adams in order to make the best terms 
possible for the Federalists, and obtain for them 
suitable recounition. Mr. Adams assured ]Mr. 
Webster that he did not intend to proscribe any 
section or any party, and added that although he 
could not give the Federalists representation in 
the cabinet, he should give them one of the impor- 
tant appointments. Mr. Webster was entirely 
satisfied with this promise and with all that was 
said by Mr. Adams, who, as everybody knows, 
was soon after elected by the House on the first 
ballot. 

Mr. Adams on his side saw plainly the necessity 
of conciliating Mr. Webster, whose great ability 
and influence he thoroughly understood. He told 
Mr. Clay that he had a high opinion of Mr. Web- 
ster, and wished to win his support; and the sav- 
age tone displayed in regard to the Edwards affair 
now disappears from the Diary. Mr. Adams, 
however, although he knew, as he says, that 
''Webster was panting for the English mission," 
and hinted that the wish might be gratified here> 
after, was not ready to go so far at the moment, 
and at the same time he sought to dissuade Mr, 
Webster from being a candidate for the speaker- 
ship, for which in truth the latter had no inclina- 
tion. Their relations, indeed, soon grew very 



RETURN TO CONGRESS 145 

pleasant. Mr. Webster naturally became the 
leader of the administration forces in the House, 
while the President on his side sought Mr. Web- 
ster's advice, admired his oration on Adams and 
Jefferson, dined at his house, and lived on terms 
of friendship and confidence with him. It is to 
be feared, however, that all this was merely on 
the surface. Mr. Adams at the bottom of his 
heart never, in reality, relaxed in his belief that 
Mr. Webster was morally unsound. Mr. Web- 
ster, on the other hand, whose Federalist opposi- 
tion to Mr. Adams had only been temporarily 
allayed, was not long in coming to the conclusion 
that his services, if appreciated, were not properly 
recognized by the administration. There was a 
good deal of justice in this view. The English 
mission never came, no help was to be obtained 
for Mr. Mason's election as senator from New 
Hampshire, the speakership was to be refused in 
order to promote harmony and strength in the 
House. To all this Mr. Webster submitted, and 
foudit the battles of the administration in debate 
as no one else could have done. Nevertheless, all 
men like recognition, and Mr. Webster would 
have preferred something more solid than words 
and confidence or the triumph of a common cause. 
When the Massachusetts senatorship was in ques- 
tion Mr. Adams urged the election of Governor 
Lincoln, and objected on the most flattering grounds 
to Mr. Webster's withdrawal from the House. It 
is not a too violent conjecture to suppose that Mr. 



146 DANIEL WEBSTER 

Webster's final acceptance of a seat in tlie Senate 
was due in large measure to a feeling that lie had 
sacrificed enough for the administration. There 
can be no doubt that coolness grew between the 
President and the senator, and that the appoint- 
ment to England, if still desired, never was made, 
so that when the next election came on Mr. Web- 
ster was inactive, and, despite his hostility to 
Jackson, viewed the overthrow of Mr. Adams 
with a o-ood deal of indifference and perhaps some 
satisfaction. It is none the less true, however, 
that during these years when the first foundations 
of the future Whig party were laid, Mr. Webster 
formed the political affiliations which were to last 
through life. He inevitably found himself asso- 
ciated with Clay and Adams, and opposed to Jack- 
son, Benton, and Van Buren, while at the same 
time he and Calhoun were fast drifting apart. 
He had no specially cordial feeling to his new 
associates; but they were at the head of the 
conservative elements of the country, they were 
nationalists in policy, and they favored the views 
which were most affected in New England. As a 
conservative and nationalist by nature and educa- 
tion, and as the great New England leader, Mr. 
Webster could not avoid becoming the parlia- 
mentary chief of Mr. Adams's administration, and 
thus paved the way for leadership in the Whig 
party of the future. 

In narrating the history of these years, I have 
confined myself to Mr. Webster's public services 



RETURN TO CONGRESS 147 

and political course. But it was a period in his 
career which was crowded with work and achieve- 
ment, bringing fresh fame and increased reputa- 
tion, and also with domestic events both of joy 
and sorrow. Mr. Webster steadily pursued the 
practice of the law, and was constantly engaged in 
the Supreme Court. To these years belong many 
of his great arguments, and also the prosecution 
of the Spanish claims, a task at once laborious and 
profitable. In the summer of 1824 Mr. Webster 
first saw Marshfield, his future home, and in the 
autumn of the same year he visited Monticello, 
where he had a long interview with Mr. Jeifferson, 
of whom he has left a most interesting description. 
During the winter he formed the acquaintance 
and lived much in the society of some well-known 
Englishmen then traveling in this country. This 
party consisted of the Earl of Derby, then Mr. 
Stanley, Lord Wharncliffe, then Mr. Stuart Wort- 
ley; Lord Taunton, then Mr. Labouchere, and 
Mr. Denison, afterwards speaker of the House of 
Commons. With Mr. Denison this acquaintance 
was the foundation of a lasting and intimate friend- 
ship maintained by correspondence. In June, 
1825, came the splendid oration at Bunker Hill, 
and then a visit to Niagara, which, of course, ap- 
pealed strongly to Mr. Webster. His account of 
it, however, although indicative of a deep mental 
impression, shows that his power of describing 
nature fell far short of his wonderful talent for 
picturing human passions and action. The next 



U8 DANIEL WEBSTER 

vacation brought the eulogy on Adams and Jef- 
ferson, wlien ])ei'haps ISlv, AVebster may he con- 
sidered to have been in his highest physical and 
intellectual perfection. Such at least was the 
opinion of Mr. Ticknor, who says : — 

" He was in the perfection of manly beauty and 
strength ; his form filled out to its finest proportions, 
and his bearing, as he stood before the vast muUitude, 
that of absolute dignity and power. His manner of 
speaking was deliberate and commanding. I never 
heard him when his manner was so grand and appro- 
priate ; . . . when he ended the minds of men were 
wrought up to an uncontrollable excitement, and tlien 
followed three tremendous cheers, inappropriate indeed, 
but as inevitable as any other great movement of na- 
ture." 

lie had held the vast audience mute for over two 
hours, as John Quincy Adams said in his diary, 
and finally their excited feelings found vent in 
cheers. He spoke greatly because he felt greatly. 
His emotions, his imagination, his entire oratorical 
temperament were then full of quick sensibility. 
When he finished writing the imaginary speech of 
John Adams in the quiet of his library and the 
silence of the morning hour, his eyes were wet with 
tears. 

A year passed by after this splendid display 
of eloquence, and then the second congressional 
period, which had been so full of work and intel- 
lectual activity and well-earned distinction, closed, 



RETURN TO CONGRESS 149 

and he entered upon that broader field which 
opened to him in tlie Senate of the United States, 
where his greatest triumphs were still to be 
achieved. 



CHAPTER VI 

THE TARIFF OF 182S AND THE REPLY TO HAYNE 

The new dignity conferred on Mr. Webster by 
the people of Massachusetts had hardly been as- 
sumed when he was called upon to encounter a 
trial which must have made all his honors seem 
poor indeed. He had scarcely taken his seat when 
he was obliged to return to New York, where fail- 
ing health had arrested Mrs. Webster's journey 
to the capital, and where, after much suffering, 
she died on January 21, 1828. The blow fell 
with terrible severity upon her husband. He had 
many sorrows to bear during his life, but this 
surpassed all others. His wife was the love of 
his youth, the mother of his children, a charming 
woman whose strong but gentle influence for good 
was now lost to him irreparably. In his last days 
his thoughts reverted to her, and as he followed 
her body to the grave, on foot in the wet and cold, 
and leading his children by the hand, it must in- 
deed have seemed as if the wine of life had been 
drunk and only the lees remained. He was exces- 
sively pale, and to those who looked upon him 
seemed crushed and heart-broken. 

The only relief was to return to his work and to 



THE TARIFF OF 1828 i&i 

the excitement of public affairs; but the cloud 
hung over him long after he was once more in his 
place in the Senate. Death had made a wound in 
his life which time healed, but of which the scar 
remained. Whatever were Mr. Webster's faults, 
his affection for those nearest to him, and espe- 
cially for the wife of his youth, was deep and 
strong. 

"The very first day of Mr. Webster's arrival and 
taking his seat in the Senate," Judge Story writes to Mr. 
Ticknor, " there was a process bill on its third reading, 
filled, as he thought, with inconvenient and mischievous 
provisions. He made, in a modest undertone, some in- 
quiries, and, upon an answer being given, he expressed 
in a few words his doubts and fears. Immediately Mr. 
Tazewell from Virginia broke out upon him in a speech 
o£ two hours. Mr. Webster then moved an adjournment, 
and on the next day delivered a most masterly speech 
in reply, expounding the whole operation of the intended 
act in the clearest manner, so that a recommitment was 
carried almost without an effort. It was a triumph of 
the most gratifying nature, and taught his opponents the 
danger of provoking a trial of his strength, even when 
he was overwhelmed by calamity. In the labors of the 
court he has found it difficult to work himself up to 
high efforts ; but occasionally he comes out with all his 
powers, and when he does, it is sure to attract a brilliant 
audience." 

It would be impossible to give a better picture 
than that presented by Judge Story of Mr. Web- 
ster's appearance and conduct in the month imme- 
diately following the death of his wife. We can 



152 DANIEL WEBSTER 

see how his talents, excited by tlie con-fliets of the 
Senate and the court, struggled, sometimes suc- 
cessfully, sometimes in vain, with the sense of loss 
and sorrow which oppressed him. 

He did not again come prominently forward in 
the Senate until the end of April, when he roused 
Iiimself to prevent injustice. The bill for the 
relief of the surviving officers of the Revolution 
seemed on the point of being lost. The object of 
the measure ai)pealed to IMr. Webster's love for 
the past, to his imagination, and his patriotism. 
He entered into the debate, delivered the fine and 
dignified speech which is preserved in his works, 
and saved the bill. 

A fortnight after this he made his famous speech 
on the tariff of 1828, a bill making extensive 
changes in the rates of duties imposed in 181G and 
1824. This speech marks an imjiortant change in 
Mr. Webster's views and in his course as a states- 
man. He now gave up his position as the ablest 
opponent in the country of the protective policy, 
and went over to the support of the tariff and the 
''American system" of Mr. Clay. Tliis change, 
in every way of great importance, subjected Mr. 
Webster to severe criticism both then and subse- 
quently. It is, therefore, necessary to examine 
briefly his previous utterances on this question in 
order to reach a correct understanding of his mo- 
tives in taking this important step and to appre- 
ciate his reasons for the adoption of a policy with 
which, after the year 1828, he was so closely iden- 
tified. 



THE TARIFF OF 1828 153 



When Mr. Webster first entered Congress lie 
was a thorough-going Federalist. But the Feder- 
alists of New England differed from their great 
chief, Alexander Hamilton, on the question of a 
protective policy. Hamilton, in his report on 
manufactures, advocated with consummate ability 
the adoption of the principle of protection for 
nascent industries as an integral and essential 
part of a true national policy, and urged it on its 
own merits, without any reference to its being in- 
cident to revenue. The New England Federalists, 
on the other hand, coming from exclusively com- 
mercial communities, were in principle free-traders. 
They regarded with disfavor the doctrine that pro- 
tection was a good thing in itself, and desired it, 
if at all, only in the most limited form and purely 
as an incident to raising revenue. With these 
opinions Mr. Webster was in full sympathy, and 
he took occasion when Mr. Calhoun, in 1814, 
spoke in favor of the existing double duties as a 
protective measure, and also in favor of manufac- 
tures, during the debate on the repeal of the em- 
bargo, to define his position on this important 
question. A few brief extracts will show his views, 
which were expressed very clearly and with his 
wonted ability and force. 

" I consider," he said, " the imposition of double du- 
ties as a mere financial measure. Its great object was 
to raise revenue, not to foster manufactures. ... I do 
not say the double duties ought to be continued. I 
tliink they ought not. But what I particularly object 



154 DANIEL WEBSTER 

to is the holding out of delusive expectations to those 
concerned in manufactures. ... In respect to manu- 
factures it is necessary to speak with some precision. 
I am not, generally speaking, their enemy. I am their 
friend ; but I am not for rearing them or any other in- 
terest in hot-beds. I would not legislate precipitately, 
even in favor of them ; above all, I would not profess 
intentions in relation to them which I did not purpose to 
execute. I feel no desire to push capital into extensive 
manufactures faster than the general progress of our 
wealth and population propels it. 

" I am not in haste to see Sheffields and Birminghams 
in America. Until the population of the country shall 
be greater in proportion to its extent, such establish- 
ments would be impracticable if attempted, and if prac- 
ticable they would be unwise." 

He then pointed out the inferiority and the 
perils of manufactures as an occupation in com- 
parison with agriculture, and concluded as fol- 
lows : — 

" I am not anxious to accelerate the approach of the 
period when the great mass of American labor shall not 
find its employment in the field ; when the young men 
of the country shall be obliged to shut their eyes upon 
external nature, upon the heavens and the earth, and 
immerse themselves in close and unwholesome work- 
shops ; when they shall be obliged to shut their ears to 
the bleatings of their own flocks upon their own hills, 
and to the voice of the lark that cheers them at the 
plough, that they may open them in dust and smoke and 
steam to the perpetual whirl of spools and spindles, and 
the grating of rasps and saws. I have made these re- 



THE TARIFF OF 1828 155 

marks, sir, not because I perceive any immediate danger 
of carrying our manufactures to an extensive height, but 
for the purpose of guarding and limiting my opinions, 
and of checking, perhaps, a little the high-wrought 
hopes of some who seem to look to our present infant 
establishments for ' more than their nature or their state 
can bear.' 

" It is the true policy of government to suffer the dif- 
ferent pursuits of society to take their own course, and 
not to give excessive bounties or encouragements to one 
over another. This, also, is the true spirit of the Con- 
stitution. It has not, in my opinion, conferred on the 
government the power of changing the occupations of the 
people of different States and sections, and of forcing 
them into other employments. It cannot prohibit com- 
merce any more than agriculture, nor manufactures any 
more than commerce. It owes protection to all." 

The sentences in italics constitute a pretty strong 
and explicit statement of the laissezfaire doctrine, 
and it will be observed that the tone of all the 
extracts is favorable to free trade and hostile to 
protection and even to manufactures in a marked 
degree. We see, also, that Mr. Webster, with 
his usual penetration and justice of perception, 
saw very clearly that uniformity and steadiness of 
policy were more essential than even the policy 
itself, and in his opinion were most likely to be 
attained by refraining from protection as much as 
possible. 

When the tariff of 1816 was under discussion 
Mr. Webster made no elaborate speech against it, 



156 DANIEL WEBSTER 

probably feeling that it was hopeless to attempt to 
defeat the measure as a whole, but he devoted 
himself with almost complete success to the task 
of reducing the proposed duties and to securing 
modifications of various portions of the bill. 

In 1820, when the tariff recommended at the 
previous session was about to come before Con- 
gress, Mr. Webster was not in public life. He 
attended, however, a meeting of merchants and 
acriculturists, held in Faneuil Hall in the summer 
of that year, to protest against the proposed tariff, 
and he spoke strongly in favor of the free trade 
resolutions which were then adopted. He began 
by saying that he was a friend to manufactures, 
but not to the tariff, which he considered as most 
injurious to the country. 

" He certainly thought it might be doubted whether 
Conoress would not be acting somewhat against the spirit 
and intention of tlie Constitution in exercising a power 
to control essentially the pursuits and occupations of in- 
dividuals in their private concerns — a power to force 
great and sudden changes both of occupation and pro- 
perty upon individuals, not as incidental to the exercise 
of any other power, but as a substantial and direct 
power.'*' 

It will be observed that he objects to the consti- 
tutionality of protection as a "direct power," and 
in the speech of 1814, in the portion quoted in 
italics, he declared against any general power still 
more forcibly and broadly. It is an impossible 
piece of subtlety and refining, therefore, to argue 



THE TARIFF OF 1828 157 

that Mr. "Webster always held consistently to liis 
views as to the limitations of the revenue power as 
a source of protection, and that he put protection 
in 1828, and subsequently sustained it after his 
change of position, on new and general constitu- 
tional grounds. In the speeches of 181-4 and 1820 
he declared expressly against the doctrine of a 
general power of protection, saying, in the latter 
instance : — 

" It would hardly be contended that Congress pos- 
sessed that sort of general power by which it might de- 
clare that particular occupations should be pursued in 
society and that others should not. If such power he- 
longed to any government in this country, it certainly 
did not belong to the general government.'" 

Mr. Webster took the New England position 
that there was no general power, and having so 
declared in this speech of 1820, he then went on 
to show that protection could only come as inci- 
dental to revenue, and that, even in this way, it 
became unconstitutional when the incident was 
turned into the principle and when protection and 
not revenue was the object of the duties. After 
arguing this point, he proceeded to discuss the 
general expediency of protection, holding it up as 
a thoroughly mistaken policy, a failure in England 
wdiich that country would gladly be rid of, and 
defending commerce as the truest and best support 
of the government and of general prosperity. He 
took up next the immediate effects of the proposed 



158 DANIEL WEBSTER 

tariff, and, premising that it would confessedly 
cause a diminution of the revenue, said : — 

" In truth, every man in the community not immedi- 
ately benefited by the new duties would suffer a double 
loss. In the first place, by shutting out the former com- 
modity, the price of the domestic manufacture would be 
raised. The consumer, therefore, must pay more for it, 
and insomuch as government will have lost the duty on 
the imported article, a tax equal to that duty must be 
paid to the government. The real amount, then, of this 
bounty on a given article will be precisely the amount 
of the present duty added to the amount of the pro- 
posed duty." 

He then went on to show the injustice which 
would be done to all manufacturers of unprotected 
articles, and ridiculed the idea of the connection 
between home industries artificially developed and 
national independence. He concluded by assail- 
ing manufacturing as an occupation, attacking it 
as a means of making the rich richer and the poor 
poorer; of injuring business by concentrating capi- 
tal in the hands of a few who obtained control of 
the corporations ; of distributing capital less widely 
than commerce; of breeding up a dangerous and 
undesirable population ; and of leading to the hurt- 
ful employment of women and children. The 
meeting, the resolutions, and the speech were all 
in the interests of unrestricted commerce and free 
trade, and Mr. Webster's doctrines were on the 
most approved pattern of New England Federal- 
ism, which, professing a mild friendship for man- 



lilJbj XiirvArjc v/A x«j-<./ 



ufactures and unwillingly conceding the minimum 
of protection solely as an incident to revenue, was, 
at bottom, thoroughly hostile to both. In 1820 
Mr. Webster stood forth, both politically and con- 
stitutionally, as a free-trader, moderate but at the 
same time decided in his opinions. 

When the tariff of 1824 was brought before 
Congress and advocated with great zeal by Mr. 
Clay, who upheld it as the "American system,'* 
Mr. Webster opposed the policy in the fullest and 
most elaborate speech he had yet made on the sub- 
ject. A distinguished American economist, Mr. 
Edward Atkinson, has described this speech of 
1824 briefly and exactly in the following words : — 

'*It contains a refutation of the exploded theory of 
the balance of trade, of the fallacy with regard to the 
exportation of specie, and of the claim that the policy 
of protection is distinctively the American policy which 
can never be improved upon, and it indicates how thor- 
oughly his judgment approved and his better nature 
sympathized with the movement towards enlightened and 
liberal commercial legislation, then already commenced 
in Great Britain." 

This speech was in truth one of great ability, 
showing a remarkable capacity for questions of 
political economy, and opening with an admirable 
discussion of the currency and of finance, in regard 
to which Mr. Webster always held and advanced 
the soundest, most scientific, and most enlightened 
views. Now, as in 1820, he stood forth as the 



160 DANIEL WEBSTER 

especial champion of commerce, which, as he said, 
had thriven without protection, had brought reve- 
nue to the government and wealth to the country, 
and would be grievously injured by the proposed 
tariff. He made his principal objection to the 
protection policy on the ground of favoritism to 
some interests at the expense of others when all 
were entitled to equal consideration. Of England 
he said, ''Because a thing has been wrongly done, 
it does not follow that it can be undone ; and this 
is the reason, as I understand it, for which exclu- 
sion, prohibition, and monopoly are suffered to 
remain in any degree in the English system." 
After examining at length the different varieties 
of protection, and displaying very thoroughly the 
state of current English opinion, he defined the 
position which he, in common with the Federalists 
of New England, then as always adhered to in the 
following words : — 

" Protection, when carried to the point which is now 
recommended, that is, to entire prohibition, seems to me 
destructive of all commercial intercourse between na- 
tions. We are urged to adopt the system on general 
principles ; ... I do not admit the general principle ; 
on the contrary, I think freedom of trade the general 
principle, and restriction the exception." 

He pointed out that the proposed protective 
policy involved a decline of commerce, and that 
steadiness and uniformity, the most essential re- 
quisites in any policy, were endangered. He then 
with great power dealt with the various points 



THE TARIFF OF 1828 IGI 

summarized by Mr. Atkinson, and concluded witli 
a detailed and learned examination of the various 
clauses of the bill, which finally passed by a small 
majority and became law. 

In 1828 came another tariff bill, so bad and so 
extreme in many respects that it was called the 
''bill of abominations." It originated in the a^i- 
tation of the woolen manufacturers which had 
started the year before, and for this bill Mr. 
Webster spoke and voted. He changed his ground 
on this important question absolutely and entirely, 
and made no pretense of doing anything else. 
The speech which he made on this occasion is a 
celebrated one, but it is so solely on account of the 
startling change of position which it announced. 
Mr. Webster has been attacked and defended for 
his action at this time with great zeal, and all the 
constitutional and economic arguments for and 
against protection are continually brought forward 
in this connection. From the tone of the discus- 
sion, it is to be feared that many of those who are 
interested in the question have not taken the trou- 
ble to read what he said. The speech of 1828 is 
by no means equal in any way to its predecessors 
in the same field. It is brief and simple to the 
last degree. It has not a shred of constitutional 
argument, nor does it enter at all into a discussion 
of general principles. It makes but one point, 
and treats that point with great force as the only 
one to be made under the circumstances, and 
thereby presents the single and sufficient reason 



162 DANIEL WEBSTER 

for its author's vote. A few lines from the speech 
give the marrow of the whole matter. Mr. Web- 
ster said : — 

" New England, sir, has not been a leader in this 
policy. On the contrary, she held back herself and tried 
to hold others back from it, from the adoption of the 
Constitution to 1824. Up to 1824 she was accused of 
sinister and selfish designs, because she discountenanced 
the progress of this policy. . . . Under this angry denun- 
ciation against her the act of 1824 passed. Now the 
imputation is of a precisely opposite character. . . . 
Both charges, sir, are equally without the slightest 
foundation. The opinion of New England up to 1824 
was founded in the conviction that, on the whole, it was 
wisest and best, both for herself and others, that manu- 
factures should make haste slowly. . . . When, at the 
commencement of the late war, duties wisre doubled, we 
were told that we should find a mitigation of the weight 
of taxation in the new aid and succor which would be 
thus afforded to our own manufacturing labor. Like 
arguments were urged, and prevailed, but not by the 
aid of New England votes, when the tariff was after- 
wards arranged at the close of the war in 1816. Fi- 
nally, after a winter's deliberation, the act of 1824 re- 
ceived the sanction of both Houses of Congress and 
settled the policy of the country. What, then, was 
New England to do ? . . . Was she to hold out forever 
against the course of the government, and see herself 
losing on one side and yet make no effort to sustain 
herself on the other ? No, sir. Nothing was left to 
New England but to conform herself to the will of 
others. Nothing was left to her but to consider that the 



THE TARIFF OF 1828 163 

government had fixed and determined its own policy; 
and that policy was protection. ... I believe, sir, al- 
most every man from New England who voted against 
the law of 1824 declared that if, notwithstanding his 
opposition to that law, it should still pass, there would 
be no alternative but to consider the course and policy 
of the government as then settled and fixed, and to act 
accordingly. The law did pass ; and a vast increase of 
investment in manufacturing establishments was the con- 
sequence." 

Opinion in New England changed for good and 
sufficient business reasons, and Mr. Webster 
changed with it. Free trade had commended itself 
to him as an abstract principle, and he had sus- 
tained and defended it as in the interest of com- 
mercial New England. But when the weight of 
interest in New England shifted from free trade 
to protection Mr. Webster followed it. His con- 
stituents were by no means unanimous in support 
of the tariff in 1828, but the majority favored it, 
and Mr. Webster went with the majority. At a 
public dinner given to him in Boston at the close 
of the session, he explained to the dissentient 
minority the reasons for his vote, which were very 
simple. He thought that good predominated over 
evil in the bill, and that the majority throughout 
the whole State of which he was the representative 
favored the tariff, and therefore he had voted in 
the affirmative. 

Much fault has been found, as has been said, 
both at the time and since, with Mr. Webster's 



164 DANIEL WEBSTER 

change of position on this question. It has been 
hehl up as a monument of inconsistency, and as 
indicating a total absence of deep conviction. 
That Mr. Webster was, in a certain sense, incon- 
sistent is beyond doubt, but consistency is the bug- 
bear of small minds, as well as a mark of strong 
characters, while its reverse is often the proof of 
wisdom. On the other hand, it may be fairly 
argued that, holding as he did that the whole thing 
was purely a business question to be decided ac- 
cording to circumstances, his course, in view of 
the policy adopted by the government, was at bot- 
tom perfectly consistent. As to the want of deep 
conviction, Mr. Webster's vote on this question 
proves nothing. He had believed in free trade as 
an abstract general principle, and there is no rea- 
son to suppose that he ever abandoned his belief 
on this ])oint. But he had too clear a mind ever 
to be run away with by the extreme vagaries of 
the Manchester school. He knew that there was 
no morality, no immutable right and wrong, in an 
impost or a free list. It has been the fashion to 
refer to Mr. Disraeli's declaration that free trade 
was ^'a mere question of expediency" as a proof 
of that gentleman's cynical indifference to moral 
principles. That the late Earl of Beaconsfield had 
no deep convictions on any subject may be readily 
admitted, but in this instance he uttered a very 
plain and simple truth, which all the talk in the 
world about free trade as the harbinger and foun- 
dation of universal peace on earth cannot disguise. 



THE TARIFF OF 1828 165 

Mr. Webster never at aii}^ time treated the ques- 
tion of free trade or j^roteclion as anytliing but 
one of expediency. Under the lead of Mr. Cal- 
houn, in 181G, the South and West initiated a 
protective policy, and after twelve years it Irad 
become firmly established and New England liad 
adapted herself to it. Mr. Webster, as a New 
England representative, resisted the protective pol- 
icy at the outset as against her interests, but when 
she had conformed to the new conditions, he came 
over to its support simply on the ground of expe- 
diency, lie rested the defense of his new position 
upon the doctrine wliich he had always consistently 
preached, that uniformity and permanency were 
the essential and sound conditions of any policy, 
whether of free trade or protection. In 1828, 
neither at the dinner in Boston nor in the Senate, 
did he enter into any discussion of general princi- 
ples or constitutional theories. He merely said, 
in substance. You have chosen to make protection 
necessary to New England, and therefore I am 
now forced to vote for it. This was the position 
which he continued to hold to the end of his life. 
As he was called upon, year after year, to defend 
protection, and as New England became more and 
more wedded to the tariff, he elaborated his argu- 
ments on many points, but the essence of all he 
said afterwards is to be found in the speech of 
1828. On the constitutional point he was obliged 
to make a more violent change. He held, of 
course, to his opinion that, under the revenue 



166 DANIEL WEBSTER 

power, protection could be incidental only, because 
from that doctrine there was no escape. But he 
dropj^ed the condemnation expressed in 1814 and 
the doubts vittered in 1820 as to the theory that it 
was within the direct power of Congress to enact 
a protective tariff, and assumed that they had this 
right as one of the general powers in the Constitu- 
tion, or that at all events they had exercised it, 
and that therefore the question was henceforward 
to be considered as res adjndicata. The sj)eech 
of 1828 marks the separation of Mr. Webster 
from the opinions of the old school of New Eng- 
land Federalism. Thereafter he stood forth as 
the champion of the tariff and of the "American 
system " of Henry Clay. Regarding protection in 
its true light, as a mere question of expediency, 
he followed the interests of New England and of 
the great industrial communities of the North. 
That he shifted his ground at the proper moment, 
bad as the "bill of abominations" was, and that, 
as a Northern statesman, he was perfectly justified 
in doing so, cannot be fairly questioned or criti- 
cised. It is true that his course was in one sense 
a sectional one, but everybody else's on this ques- 
tion was the same, and it could not be, it never 
has been, and never will be otherwise. 

The tariff of 1828 was destined indirectly to 
have far more important results to Mr. Webster 
than the brief speech in which he signalized his 
change of position on the question of protection. 
Soon after the passage of the act, in May, 1828, 



THE TARIFF OF 1828 167 

the South Carolina delegation held a meeting to 
take steps to resist the operation of the tarilBP, but 
nothing definite was then accomplished. Popular 
meetings in South Carolina, characterized by much 
violent talk, followed, however, during the sum- 
mer, and in the autumn the legislature of the 
State put forth the famous "exposition and pro- 
test " which emanated from Mr. Calhoun, and em- 
bodied in the fullest and strongest terms the prin- 
ciples of "nullification." These movements were 
viewed with regret and with some alarm through- 
out the country, but they were rather lost sight of 
in the intense excitement of the presidential elec- 
tion. The accession of Jackson then came to 
absorb the public attention, and brought with it 
the sweeping removals from office which Mr. Web- 
ster strongly denounced. At the same time he 
was not led into the partisan absurdity of denying 
the President's power of removal, and held to the 
impregnable position of steady resistance to the 
evils of patronage, which could be cured only by 
the operation of an enlightened public sentiment. 
It is obvious now that, in the midst of all this 
agitation about other matters, Mr. Calhoun and 
the South Carolinians never lost sight of the con- 
flict for which they were preparing, and that they 
were on the alert to bring nullification to the front 
in a more menacing and pronounced fashion than 
had yet been attempted. 

The grand assault was finally made in the Sen- 
ate, under thc' eye of the great nuUifier, who then 



168 DANIEL WEBSTER 

occupied the chair of the Vice-President, and came 
in an unexpected way. Li December, 1829, Mr. 
Foote of Connecticut introduced a hannless reso- 
hition of inquiry respecting the sales and surveys 
of the Western hinds. In the long-drawn debate 
which ensued, General Ilayne of South Carolina, 
on January 19, 1830, made an elaborate attack on 
the New En o land States. He accused them of a 
desire to check the growth of the West in the in- 
terests of the protective policy, and tried to show 
the sympathy which should exist between the West 
and South, and lead them to make common cause 
asfainst the tariff. Mr. Webster felt that this at- 
tack could not be left unanswered, and the next 
day he replied to it. This first speech on Foote 's 
resolution has been so obscured by the greatness 
of the second that it is seldom referred to and but 
little read. Yet it is one of the most effective 
retorts, one of the strongest ])ieces of destructive 
criticism, ever uttered in the Senate, although its 
purpose was simply to repel the charge of hostility 
to the West on the part of New England. The 
accusation was in fact absurd, and but few years 
had elapsed since Mr. Webster and New England 
had been assailed by Mr. McDuffie for desiring 
to build up the West at the expense of the South 
by the policy of internal improvements. It was 
not difficult, therefore, to show the groundlessness 
of this new attack, but Mr. Webster did it with 
consummate art and great force, shattering Hayne's 
elaborate argument to pieces and treading it under 



THE REPLY TO HAYNE 169 

foot. Mr. Webster only alluded incidentiilly to 
the tariff agitation in South Carolina, but the 
crushing nature of the reply inflamed and morti- 
fied Mr. ILiyne, who, on the following day, in- 
sisted on Mr. A\\d)ster's jn-esenee, and spoke for 
the second time at great length. He made again 
a bitter attack upon New England, upon ^Ir. 
Webster personally, and upon the character and 
patriotism of Massachusetts. He then made a full 
exposition of the doctrine of nullification, giving 
free expression of the views and principles enter- 
tained by his master and leader, who presided over 
the discussion. The debate had now drifted far 
from the original resolution, but its real object 
had been reached at last. The war upon the tariff 
had been begun, and the standard of nullification 
and of resistance to the Union and to the laws of 
Congress had been i)lanted boldly in the Senate 
of the United States. The debate was adjourned 
and Mr. Hayne did not conclude till January 25. 
The next day Mr. Webster replied in the second 
speech on Foote's resolution, which is popularly 
known as the "Reply to Hayne." 

This great speech marks the highest point at- 
tained by Mr. Webster as a public man. He 
never surpassed it, he never equaled it afterwards. 
It was his zenith intellectually, politically, and as 
an orator. His fame grew and extended in the 
years which followed, he won ample distinction in 
other fields, he made many other splendid speeches, 
but he never went beyond the reply which he made 



170 DANIEL WEBSTER 

to the Senator from South Carolma on January 
26, 1830. 

The doctrine of nullification, which was the 
main point both with Ha} ne. and AVebster, was 
no new thing. The word was borrowed from the 
Kentucky resolutions of 1799, and the principle 
was contained in the more cautious phrases of the 
contemporary Virginia resolutions and of the Hart- 
ford Convention in 1814. The South Carolinian 
reproduction in 1830 was fuller and more elaborate 
than its predecessors and supported by more acute 
reasoning, but the principle was unchanged. Mr. 
Webster's argument was simple but overwhelming. 
He admitted fully the right of revolution. He 
accepted the proposition that no one was bound to 
obey an unconstitutional law; but the essential 
question was who was to say whether a law was 
unconstitutional or not. Each State has that au- 
thority, was the reply of the nullifiers, and if the 
decision is against the validity of the law it cannot 
be executed within the limits of the dissenting 
State. The vigorous sarcasm with which Mr. Web- 
ster depicted a practical nullification, and showed 
that it was nothing more nor less than revolution 
when actually carried out, was really the conclu- 
sive answer to the nullifying doctrine. But Mr. 
Calhoun and his school eagerly denied that nullifi- 
cation rested on the riglit to revolt against opjires- 
sion. They argued that it was a constitutional 
right; that they could live within the Constitution 
and beyond it, — inside the house and outside it 



THE REPLY TO llAYNE 171 

at one and the same time. They contended that, 
the Constitution being a compact between the 
States, the Federal government was the creation 
of the States; yet, in the same breatli, they de- 
clared that the general government was a party to 
the contract from which it had itself emanated, in 
order to get rid of the difficulty of proving that, 
while the single dissenting State could decide 
against the validity of a law, the twenty or more 
other States, also parties to the contract, had no 
right to deliver an opposite judgment which should 
be binding as the opinion of the majority of the 
court. There was nothing very ingenious or very 
profound in the argument by which Mr. Webster 
demonstrated the absurdity of the doctrine which 
attempted to make nullification a peaceable con- 
stitutional privilege, when it could be in practice 
nothinof else than revolution. But the manner in 
which he put the argument was magnificent and 
final. As he himself said, in this very speech, of 
Samuel Dexter, "his statement was argument, his 
inference demonstration." 

The weak places in his armor were historical in 
their nature. It was probably necessary, at all 
events Mr. Webster felt it to be so, to argue that 
the Constitution at the outset was not a compact 
between the States, but a national instrument, and 
to distinguish the cases of Virginia and Kentucky 
in 1799 and of New England in 1814, from that 
of South Carolina in 1830. The former point he 
touched upon lightly, the latter he discussed ably, 



172 DANIEL WEBSTER 

eloquently, ingeniously, and at length. Unfoitu- 
iiately the facts were against him in both instances. 
When the Constitution was adopted by the votes 
of States at Philadelphia, and accepted by the 
votes of States in popular conventions, it is safe 
to say that there was not a man in the country 
from Washington and Hamilton on the one -side, 
to George Clinton and George Mason on the 
other, who regarded the new system as anything 
but an experiment entered upon by the States and 
from which each and every State had the right 
peaceably to withdraw, a right which was very 
likely to be exercised. When the Virginia and 
Kentucky resolutions appeared they were not op- 
posed on constituti(mal grounds, but on those of 
expediency and of hostility to the revolution which 
they were considered to embody. Hamilton, and 
no one knew the Constitution better than he, 
treated them as the beginnings of an attem])t to 
change the goveriunent, as the germs of a cons])ir- 
acy to destroy the Union. As Dr. Von Hoist 
tersely and accurately states it, "there was no 
time as yet to attemj)t to strangle the healthy 
human mind in a net of logical deductions." That 
was the work reserved for John C. Calhoun. 

What is true of 1799 is true of the New Eng- 
land leaders at Washington w^hen they discussed 
the feasilnlity of secession in 1804; of the declar- 
ation in favor of secession made by Josiah Quincy 
in Congress a few years later; of the resistance of 
New England during the war of 1812, and of the 



THE REPLY TO HAYNE 173 

right of "interposition" set forth by the Hartford 
Convention. In all these instances no one tron- 
blecl himself about the constitutional aspect; it 
was a question of expediency, of moral and politi- 
cal right or wrong. In every case the right was 
smij)ly stated, and the uniform answer was, such 
a step means the overthrow of the present system. 
When South Carolina began her resistance to 
the tariff in 1830, times had changed, and with 
them the popular conception of the government 
established by the Constitution. It was now a 
much more serious thing to threaten the existence 
of the Federal government than it had been in 
1799, or even in 1814. The great fabric which 
had been gradually built up made an overthrow of 
the government look very terrible ; it made peace- 
able secession a mockery, and a withdrawal from 
the Union equivalent to civil war. The boldest 
hesitated to espouse any principle which was 
avowedly revolutionary, and on both sides men 
wished to have a constitutional defense for every 
doctrine which they promulgated. This was the 
feelins- which led Mr. Calhoun to elaborate and 
perfect with all the ingenuity of his acute and 
logical mind the arguments in favor of nullification 
as a constitutional principle. At the same time 
the theory of nullification, however much elabo- 
rated, had not altered in its essence from the bald 
and brief statement of the Kentucky resolutions. 
The vast change had come on the other side of the 
question, in the popular idea of the Constitution. 



174 DANIEL WEBSTER 

It was no longer regarded as an experiment from 
which the contracting parties had a right to with- 
draw, but as the charter of a national government 
which the greatest men among its framers hoped 
it would come to be. ''It is a critical moment," 
said Mr. Bell of New Hampshire to IVIr. Webster, 
on the morning of Januarj^ 26, "and it is time, it 
is high time that the people of this country should 
know what this Constitution is." "Then," an- 
swered Mr. Webster, "by the blessing of heaven 
they shall learn, this day, before the sun goes 
down, what I understand it to be." With these 
words on his lips he entered the senate chamber, 
and when he replied to Hayne he stated what the 
Union and the government had come to be at that 
moment. He defined the character of the Union 
as it existed in 1830, and that definition so mag- 
nificently stated, and with such grand eloquence, 
went home to the hearts of the people, and put 
into noble words the sentiment which they felt but 
had not expressed. This was the significance of 
the reply to Hayne. It mattered not what men 
thought of the Constitution in 1789. The govern- 
ment which was then established might have degen- 
erated into a confederation little stronger than its 
predecessor. But the Constitution did its work 
better, and converted a confederacy into a nation. 
!Mr. AVebster set forth the national conception of 
the Union. He expressed what many men were 
vaguely thinking and believing, and the principles 
which he made clear and definite went on broaden- 



THE REPLY TO HAYNE 175 

ing and deepening until, thirty years afterwards, 
they had a force sufficient to sustain the North and 
enable her to triumph in the terrible struggle which 
resulted in the preservation of national life. When 
Mr. Webster showed that practical nullification 
was revolution, he had answered completely the 
South Carolinian doctrine, for revolution is not 
susceptible of constitutional argument. But in 
the state of public opinion at that time it was 
necessary to discuss nullification on constitutional 
grounds also, and Mr. Webster did this as elo- 
quently and ably as the nature of the case admitted. 
Whatever the historical defects of his position, 
he put weapons into the hands of every friend of 
the Union, and gave reasons and arguments to 
the doubting and timid. Yet after all is said, the 
meaning of Mr. Webster's speech In our history 
and its significance to us are, that it set forth with 
every attribute of eloquence the nature of the 
Union as It had developed under the Constitution. 
He took the vague popular conception and gave it 
life and form and character. He said, as he alone 
could say, the people of the United States are a 
nation, they are the masters of an empire, their 
union is indivisible, and the words which then 
rang: out in the senate chamber have come down 
through long years of political conflict and of civil 
war, until at last they are part of the political 
creed of every one of his fellow countrymen. 

The reply to Hayne cannot, however, be dis- 
missed with a consideration of its historical and 



176 DANIEL WEBSTER 

political meaning or of its constitutional signifi- 
cance. It has a personal and literary importance 
of hardly less moment. There comes an occasion, 
a period perhaps, in the life of every man when he 
touches his liighest point, when he does his best, 
or even, under a sudden insi)iration and excite- 
ment, something better than his best, and to which 
he can never again attain. At the moment it is 
often impossible to detect this point, but when the 
man and his career have passed into history, and 
we can survey it all spread out before us like a 
map, the pinnacle of success can easily be discov- 
ered. The reply to Hayne was the zenith of Mr. 
Webster's life, and it is the place of all others 
where it is fit to pause and study him as a parlia- 
mentary orator and as a master of elocpience. 

Before attempting, however, to analyze what he 
said, let us strive to recall for a moment the scene 
of his great triumph. On the morning of the 
memorable da}^ the senate chamber was packed 
by an eager and excited crowd. Every seat on 
the floor and in the galleries was occupied, and all 
the available standing-room was filled. The pro- 
tracted debate, conducted with so much ability on 
both sides, had excited the attention of the wdiole 
country, and had given time for the arrival of 
hundreds of interested spectators from all parts 
of the Union, and especially from New England. 
The fierce attacks of the Southern leaders had 
angered and alarmed the people of the North. 
They longed with an intense longing to have these 



THE REPLY TO HAYNE 177 

assaults met and repelled, and yet they could not 
believe that this apparently desperate feat could 
be successfully accomplished. Men of the North 
and of New England could be known in Washing- 
ton, in those days, by their indignant but dejected 
looks and downcast eyes. They gathered in the 
senate chamber on the appointed day, quivering 
with anticipation, and with hope and fear strug- 
gling for the mastery in their breasts. With them 
were mingled those who were there from mere 
curiosity, and those who had come rejoicing in the 
confident expectation that the Northern chamj)ion 
would suffer failure and defeat. 

In the midst of the liusli of expectation, in that 
dead silence which is so peculiarly oppressive be- 
cause it is possible only when many human beings 
are gathered together, Mr. Webster rose. He 
had sat impassive and immovable during all the 
preceding days, while the storm of argument and 
invective had beaten about his head. At last his 
time had come; and as he rose and stood forth, 
drawing himself up to his full height, his personal 
grandeur and his majestic calm thrilled all who 
looked upon him. With perfect quietness, unaf- 
fected apparently by the atmosphere of intense 
feeling about him, he said, in a low, even tone: 
"Mr. President: When the mariner has been 
tossed for many days in thick weather and on an 
unknown sea, he naturally avails himself of the 
first pause in the storm, the earliest glance of the 
sun, to take his latitude and ascertain how far 



178 DANIEL WEBSTER 

the elements have driven him from his true course. 
Let us imitate this prudence; and, before we float 
farther on the waves of this debate, refer to the 
point from which we departed, that we may, at 
least, be able to conjecture where we now are. I 
ask for the reading of the resolution before the 
Senate." This opening sentence was a piece of 
consummate art. The simple and appropriate im- 
age, the low voice, the calm manner, relieved the 
strained excitement of the audience, which might 
have ended by disconcerting the speaker if it had 
been maintained. Every one was now at his ease ; 
and when the monotonous reading of the resolu- 
tion ceased Mr. Webster was master of the situa- 
tion, and had his listeners in complete control. 
With breathless attention they followed him as he 
proceeded. The strong masculine sentences, the 
sarcasm, the pathos, the reasoning, the burning 
appeals to love of State and country, flowed on 
unbroken. As his feelings warmed the fire came 
into his eyes; there was a glow on his swarthy 
cheek; his strong right arm seemed to sweep away 
resistlessly the whole phalanx of his opponents, 
and the deep and melodious cadences of his voice 
sounded like harmonious organ-tones as they filled 
the chamber with their music; As the last words 
died away into silence, those who had listened 
looked wonderingly at each other, dimly conscious 
that they had heard one of the grand speeches 
which are landmarks in the history of eloquence; 
\nd the men of the North and of New England 



THE REPLY TO IIAYNE 179 

went forth full of the pride of victory, for their 
champion had triumphed, and no assurance was 
needed to prove to the world that this time no 
answer could be made. 

As every one knows, this speech contains much 
more than tlie argument against nullification, which 
has just been discussed, and exhibits all its author's 
intellectual gifts in the highest perfection. Mr. 
Hayne had touched on every conceivable subject 
of political importance, including slavery, which, 
however covered up, was really at the bottom of 
every Southern movement, and was certain sooner 
or later to come to the surface. All these various 
topics Mr. Webster took up, one after another, 
displaying a most remarkable strength of grasp 
and ease of treatment. lie dealt with them all 
effectively and yet in just proportion. Through- 
out there are bursts of eloquence skillfully mingled 
with statement and argument, so that the listeners 
were never wearied by a strained and continuous 
rhetorical display; and yet, while the attention 
was closely held by the even flow of lucid reason- 
ing, the emotions and passions were from time to 
time deeply aroused and strongly excited. In 
many passages of direct retort Mr. Webster used 
an irony which he employed always in a perfectly 
characteristic way. He had a strong natural sense 
of humor, but he never made fun or descended to 
trivial efforts to excite laughter against his oppo- 
nent. He was not a witty man or a maker of 
epigrams. But he was a master in the use of a 



180 DANIEL WEBSTER 

cold, dignified sarcasm, wliicli at times, and in 
this instance particnlarly, he used freely and mer- 
cilessly. Beneath the measured sentences there 
is a lurking smile which saves them from being 
merely savage and cutting attacks, and yet brings 
home a keen sense of the absurdity of the oppo- 
nent's position. The weapon resembled more the 
sword of Kichard than the scimetar of Saladin, 
but it was none the less a keen and trenchant 
blade. There is probably no better instance of 
Mr. Webster's power of sarcasm than the famous 
passage in which he replied to Hayne's taunt 
about the "murdered coalition," which was said 
to have existed between Adams and Calhoun. In 
a totally different vein is the passage about Massa- 
chusetts, perhaps in its way as good an example 
as we have of Webster's power of appealing to 
the higher and more tender feelings of human 
nature. The thought is simple and even obvious, 
and the expression unadorned, and yet what he 
said had that subtle quality which stirred and still 
stirs the heart of every man born on the soil of 
the old Puritan Commonwealth. 

The speech as a whole has all the qualities which 
made Mr. Webster a great orator, and the same 
traits run through his other speeches. An analy- 
sis of the reply to Hayne, therefore, gives us all 
the conditions necessary to forming a correct idea 
of Mr. Webster's eloquence, of its characteristics 
and its value. The Attic school of oratory subor- 
dinated form to thought to avoid the misuse of 



THE REPLY TO HAYNE 181 

ornament, and triumphed over the more florid 
practice of the so-called "Asiatics." Rome gave 
the palm to Atticism, and modern oratory has gone 
still farther in the same direction, until its pre- 
dominant quality has become that of making sus- 
tained appeals to the understanding. Logical vigi- 
lance and long chains of reasoning, avoided by 
the ancients, are the essentials of our modern ora- 
tory. Many able men have achieved success under 
these conditions as forcible and convincing speak- 
ers. But the grand eloquence of modern times is 
distinguished by the bursts of feeling, of imagery 
or of invective, joined with convincing argument. 
This combination is rare, and whenever we find 
a man who possesses it we may be sure that, in 
greater or less degree, he is one of the great mas- 
ters of eloquence as we understand it. The names 
of those who in debate or to a jury have been in 
every-day practice strong and effective speakers, 
and also have thrilled and shaken large masses of 
men, readily occur to us. To this class belong 
Chatham and Burke, Fox, Sheridan and Erskine, 
Mirabeau and Vergniaud, Patrick Henry and Dan- 
iel Webster. 

Mr. Webster was of course essentially modern 
in his oratory. He relied chiefly on the sustained 
appeal to the understanding, and he was a con- 
spicuous example of the prophetic character which 
Christianity, and Protestantism especially, has 
given to modern eloquence. At the same time 
Mr. Webster was in some respects more classical, 



182 DANIEL WEBSTER 

and resembled more closely the models of anti- 
quity, than any of those who have been mentioned 
as belonging to the same high class. He was wont 
to pour forth the copious stream of plain, intelli- 
gible observations, and indulge in the varied ap- 
peals to feeling, memory, and interest, which Lord 
Brougham sets down as characteristic of ancient 
oratory. It has been said that while Demosthenes 
was a sculptor, Burke was a painter. Mr. Webster 
was distinctly more of the former than the latter. 
He rarely amplified or developed an image or a de- 
scription, and in this he followed the Greek rather 
than the Englishman. Dr. Francis Lieber wrote : 
"To test Webster's oratory, which has ever been 
very attractive to me, I read a portion of my fa- 
vorite speeches of Demosthenes, and then read, 
always aloud, parts of Webster; then returned to 
the Athenian ; and Webster stood the test." Apart 
from the great compliment which this conveys, 
such a comparison is very interesting as showing 
the similarity between Mr. Webster and the Greek 
orator. Not only does the test indicate the merit 
of Mr. Webster's speeches, but it also proves that 
he resembled the Athenian, and that the likeness 
was more striking than the inevitable difference 
born of race and time. Yet there is no indication 
that Webster ever made a study of the ancient 
models or tried to form himself upon them. 

The cause of the classic self-restraint in Webster 
was partly due to the artistic sense which made 
him so devoted to simplicity of diction, and partly 



THE REPLY TO HAYNE 183 

to the cast of liis mind, lie had a powerful his- 
toric imagination, but not in the least the imagi- 
nation of the poet, which 

*' Bodies forth the forms of things unknown." 

He could describe with great vividness, brevity, 
and force what had happened in the past, what 
actually existed, or what the future promised. 
But his fancy never ran away with him or carried 
him captive into the regions of poetry. Imagina- 
tion of this sort is readily curbed and controlled, 
and, if less brilliant, is safer than that defined by 
Shakespeare. For this reason, Mr. Webster rarely 
indulged in long, descriptive passages, and while 
he showed the highest power in treating anything 
with a touch of humanity about it, he was sparing 
of images drawn wholly from nature, and was not 
peculiarly successful in depicting in words natural 
scenery or phenomena. The result is that in his 
highest flights, while he is often grand and affect- 
ing, full of life and power, he never shows the 
creative imagination. But if he falls short on the 
poetic side, there is the counterbalancing advan- 
tage that there is never a false note nor an over- 
wrought description which offends our taste and 
jars upon our sensibilities. 

Mr. Webster showed his love of direct simpli- 
city in his style even more than in his thought or 
the general arrangement and composition of his 
speeches. His sentences are, as a rule, short, and 
therefore pointed and intelligible, but they never 






184 DANIEL WEBSTER 

become monotonous and harsh, the fault to which 
brevity is always liable. On the contrary, they 
are smooth and flowing, and there is always a 
sufficient variety of form. The choice of language 
is likewise simple. Mr. Webster was a remorse- 
less critic of his own style, and he had an almost 
extreme preference for Anglo-Saxon words and a 
corresponding dislike of Latin derivatives. The 
only exception he made was in his habit of using 
commence " instead of its far superior simony m 
begin." His style was vigorous, clear, and di- 
rect in the highest degree, and at the same time 
warm and full of vitality. He displayed that rare 
union of great strength with perfect simplicity, 
the qualities w^hich made Swift the almost unri- 
valed master of pure, simple, and forcible English. 
Charles Fox is credited with saying that a good 
speech never reads well. This opinion, taken in 
the sense in wliich it was intended, that a carefully 
prepared speech, which reads like an essay, lacks 
the freshness and glow that should characterize the 
oratory of debate, is undoubtedly correct. But 
it is equally true that when a speech which we 
know to have been good in delivery is equally good 
in print, a higher intellectual plane is reached and 
a hisfher level of excellence is attained than is 
possible to either the mere essay or to the effective 
retort or argument, which loses its flavor with the 
occasion which draws it forth. Mr. Webster's 
speeches on the tarifl:', on the bank, and on like 
subjects, able as they are, are necessarily dry, but 



THE REPLY TO IIAYNE 185 

his speeches on nobler themes are admirable read- 
ing. This is, of course, due to the variety and 
ease of treatment, to their power, and to the purity 
of the style. At the same time, the immediate 
effect of what he said was immense, greater, even, 
than the intrinsic merit of the speech itself. There 
has been much discussion as to the amount of pre- 
paration which Mr. Webster made. His occasional 
orations were, of course, carefully written out be- 
forehand, a practice which was entirely proper; 
but in his great parliamentary speeches, and often 
in legal arguments as well, he made but slight 
preparation in the ordinary sense of the term. 
The notes for the two speeches on Foote's resolu- 
tion were jotted down on a few sheets of note- 
paper. The delivery of the second one, his mas- 
terpiece, was practically extemporaneous, and yet 
it fills seventy octavo pages and occupied four 
hours. He is reported to have said that his whole 
life had been a preparation for the reply to Hayne. 
Whether he said it or not, the statement is per- 
fectly true. The thoughts on the Union and on 
the grandeur of American nationality had been 
garnered up for years, and this in a greater or 
less degree was true of all his finest efforts. The 
preparation on paper was trifling, but the mental 
preparation extending over weeks or days, some- 
times, perhaps, over years, was elaborate to the 
last point. When the moment came, a night's 
work would put all the stored-up thoughts in order, 
and on the next day they would pour forth with 



186 DANIEL WEBSTER 

all the power of a strong mind thoroughly saturated 
with its subject, and yet with the vitality of un- 
premeditated expression, having the fresh glow of 
morning upon it, and no trace of the lamp. 

More than all this, however, in tlie immediate 
effect of Mr. Webster's speeches was the physical 
influence of the man himself. AVe can but half 
understand his eloquence and its influence if we 
do not carefully study his physical attributes, his 
temperament and disposition. In face, form, and 
voice, nature did her utmost for Daniel Webster. 
No envious fairy was present at his birth to mar 
these gifts by her malign influence. He seemed 
to every one to be a giant; that, at least, is the 
word we most commonly find applied to him, and 
there is no better proof of his enormous physical 
impressiveness than this well-known fact, for Mr. 
Webster was not a man of extraordinary stature. 
He was five feet ten inches in heiglit, and, in 
health, weighed a little less than two hundred 
pounds. These are the proportions of a large 
man, but there is nothing remarkable about them. 
We must look elsewhere than to mere size to dis- 
cover why men spoke of Webster as a giant. He 
had a swarthy complexion and straight black hair. 
His head was very large, the brain weighing, as 
is well known, more than any on record, except 
those of Cuvier and of the celebrated bricklayer. 
At the same time his head was of noble shape, 
with a broad and lofty brow, and his features were 
finely cut and full of massive strength. His eyes 



THE REPLY TO HaYXE 187 

were extraordinary. They were very dark and 
deep-set, and, when he began to rouse himself to 
action, shone with the deep light of a forge-fire, 
getting ever more glowing as excitement rose. 
His voice was in harmony with his appearance. 
It was low and musical in conversation ; in debate 
it was high but full, ringing out in moments of 
excitement like a clarion, and then sinking to deep 
notes with the solemn richness of organ -tones, 
while the words were accompanied by a manner in 
which grace and dignity mingled in complete ac- 
cord. The impression which he produced upon 
the eye and ear it is difficult to express. There is 
no man in all history who came into the world so 
equipped physically for speech. In this direction 
nature could do no more. The mere look of the 
man and the sound of his voice made all who saw 
and heard him feel that he must be the embodi- 
ment of wisdom, dignity, and strength, divinely 
eloquent, even if he sat in dreamy silence or ut- 
tered nothing but heavy commonplaces. 

It is commonly said that no one of the many 
pictures of Mr. Webster gives a true idea of what 
he was. We can readily believe this when we 
read the descriptions which have come down to us. 
That indefinable quality which we call personal 
magnetism, the power of impressing by one's per- 
sonality every human being who comes near, was 
at its height in Mr. V»^ebster. He never, for in- 
stance, punished his children, but when they did 
wrong he would send for them and look at them 



188 DAN1P:L WEBSTER 

silently. The look, whether of anger or sorrow, 
was punishment and rebuke enough. It was the 
same with other children. The little dauofhter 
of Mr. Wirt once came into a room where Mr. 
Webster was sitting with his back toward her, 
and touched him on the arm. He turned suddenly, 
and the child started back with an affrighted cry 
at the sight of the dark, stern, melancholy face. 
But the cloud passed as swiftly as the shadows on 
a summer sea, and the next moment the look of 
affection and humor brought the frightened child 
into Mr. Webster's arms, and they were friends 
and playmates in an instant. 

The power of a look and of changing expression, 
so magical with a child, was hardly less so with 
men. There have been very few instances in his- 
tory where there is such constant reference to 
merely physical attributes as in the case of Mr. 
Webster. His general appearance and his eyes 
are the first and last things alluded to in every 
contemporary description. Every one is familiar 
with the story of the English navvy who pointed at 
Mr. Webster in the streets of Liverpool and said, 
"There goes a king." Sidney Smith exclaimed 
when he saw him, "Good heavens, he is a small 
cathedral by himself." Carlyle, no lover of Amer- 
ica, wrote to Emerson : — 

" Not many days ago I saw at breakfast tlie notablest 
of all your notabilities, Daniel Webster. He is a mag- 
nificent specimen. You might say to all the world, 
'This is our Yankee Englishman; such limbs we make 



THE REPLY TO HAYNE 189 

in Yankee land ! ' As a logic fencer, or parliamentary 
Hercules, one would incline to back him at first sight 
against all the extant world. The tanned complexion ; 
that amorphous crag-like face ; the dull black eyes un- 
der the precipice of brows, like dull anthracite furnaces 
needing only to be blown ; the mastiff mouth accurately 
closed ; I have not traced so much of silent Berserkir 
rage that I remember of in any man. ' I guess I should 
not like to be your nigger ! ' Webster is not loquacious, 
but he is pertinent, conclusive ; a dignified, perfectly 
bred man, though not English in breeding ; a man wor- 
thy of the best reception among us, and meeting such 
I understand." 

Such was the effect produced by Mr. Webster 
when in England, and it was a universal impres- 
sion. Wherever he went men felt in the depths 
of their being the amazing force of his personal 
presence. He could control an audience by a 
look, and could extort applause from hostile lis- 
teners by a mere glance. On one occasion, after 
the 7th of March speech, there is a story that a 
noted abolitionist leader was present in the crowd 
gathered to hear Mr. Webster, and this bitter op- 
ponent is reported to have said afterwards, " When 
Webster, speaking of secession, asked ' what is to 
become of me, ' I was thrilled with a sense of some 
awful impending calamity." The story may be 
apocryphal, but there can be no doubt of its essen- 
tial truth so far as the effect of Mr. Webster's 
personal presence goes. People looked at him, 
and that was enough. Mr. Parton in his essay 



190 DANIEL WEBSTER 

speaks of seeing Webster at a public dinner, sit- 
tinir at the head of the table with a bottle of 
Madeira under his yellow waistcoat, and looking 
like Jove. When he presided at the Cooper me- 
morial meeting in New York he uttered only a 
few stately platititdes, and yet every one went 
away with the firm conviction that he had spoken 
words of the profoundest wisdom and grandest 
eloquence. 

The temptation to rely on his marvelous physi- 
cal gifts grew on him as he became older, which 
was to be expected with a man of his temperament. 
Even in his early days, when he was not in action, 
he had an impassible and slumberous look; and 
when he sat listening to the invective of Hayne, 
no emotion could be traced on his cold, dark, 
melancholy face, or in the cavernous eyes shining 
with a dull light. This all vanished when he be- 
gan to s})eak, and, as he poured forth his strong, 
w^eighty sentences, there was no lack of expression 
or of movement. But Mr. Webster, despite his 
capacity for work, and his protracted and often 
intense labor, was constitutionally indolent, and 
this sluggishness of temperament increased very 
much as he grew older. It extended from the 
periods of repose to those of action until, in his 
later years, a direct stimulus was needed to make 
him exert himself. Even to the last the mighty 
power was still there in undiminished strength, 
but it was not willingly put forth. Sometimes the 
outside impulse would not come; sometimes the 



THE REPLY TO HAYNE 191 

most trivial incident would siiffioc, and like a spark 
on the train of gunpowder would bring a sudden 
burst of eloquence, electrifying all who listened. 
On one occasion he was arguing a case to the jury. 
He was talking in his heaviest and most ponderous 
fashion, and with half -closed eyes. The court 
and the jurymen were nearly asleep as Mr. Web- 
ster argued on, stating the law quite WTongly to 
his nodding listeners. The counsel on the other 
side interrupted him and called the attention of 
the court to Mr. Webster's presentation of the 
law. The judge, thus awakened, explained to the 
jury that the law was not as Mr. Webster stated 
it. While this colloquy was in progress Mr. Web- 
ster roused up, pushed back his thick hair, shook 
himseK, and glanced about him with the look of 
a caged lion. When the judge paused, he turned 
again to the jury, his eyes no longer haK shut but 
wide open and glowing with excitement. Raising 
his voice, he said, in tones which made every one 
start: "If my client could recover under the law 
as I stated it, how much more is he entitled to 
recover under the law as laid down by the court; " 
and then, the jury now being thoroughly awake, 
he poured forth a flood of eloquent argument and 
won his case. In his latter days Mr. Webster 
made many careless and dull speeclies and carried 
them through by the power of his look and man- 
ner, but the time never came when, if fairly 
aroused, he failed to sway the hearts and under- 
standings of men by a grand and splendid elo- 



192 DANIEL WEBSTER 

quence. The lion slept very often, but it never 
became safe to rouse him from his slumber. 

It was soon after the reply to Hayne that Mr. 
Webster made his great argument for the gov- 
ernment in the White murder case. One other 
address to a jury in the Goodridge case, and the 
defense of Judge Prescott before the Massachusetts 
Senate, which is of similar character, have been 
preserved to us. The speech for Prescott is a 
strong, dignified appeal to the sober, and yet 
sympathetic, judgment of his hearers, but wholly 
free from any attempt to confuse or mislead, or to 
sway the decision by unwholesome pathos. Under 
the circumstances, which were very adverse to his 
client, the argument was a model of its kind, and 
contains some very fine passages full of the solemn 
force so characteristic of its author. The Good- 
ridge speech is chiefly remarkable for the ease 
with which Mr. Webster unraveled a complicated 
set of facts, demonstrated that the accuser was in 
reality the guilty party, and carried irresistible 
conviction to the minds of the jurors. It was 
connected with a remarkable exhibition of his 
power of cross-examination, which was not only 
acute and penetrating, but extremely terrifying 
to a recalcitrant witness. The argument in the 
White case, as a specimen of eloquence, stands on 
far higher ground than either of the other two, 
and, apart from the nature of the subject, ranks 
with the very best of Mr. Webster's oratorical 
triumphs. The opening of the speech, comprising 



THE REPLY TO HAYNE 193 

the account of the murder and the analysis of the 
workings of a mind seared with the remembrance 
of a horrid crime, must be placed among the very 
finest masterpieces of modern oratory. The de- 
scription of the feelings of the murderer has a 
touch of the creative power, but, taken in conjunc- 
tion with the wonderful picture of the deed itself, 
the whole exhibits the highest imaginative excel- 
lence, and displays the possession of an extraordi- 
nary dramatic force such as Mr. Webster rarely 
exerted. It has the same power of exciting a 
kind of horror and of making us shudder with a 
creeping, nameless terror as the scene after the 
murder of Duncan, when Macbeth rushes out from 
the chamber of death, crying, "I have done the 
deed. Didst thou not hear a noise?" I have 
studied this famous exordium with extreme care, 
and I have sought diligently in the works of all 
the great modern orators, and of some of the an- 
cient as well, for similar passages of higher merit. 
My quest has been in vain. Mr. Webster's de- 
scription of the White murder, and of the ghastly 
haunting sense of guilt which pursued the assassin, 
has never been surpassed in dramatic force by any 
speaker, whether in debate or before a jury. Per- 
haps the most celebrated descriptive passage in 
the literature of modern elocpience is the picture 
drawn by Burke of the descent of Ilyder Ali upon 
the plains of the Carnatic, but even that certainly 
falls short of the opening of Webster's speech in 
simple force as well as in dramatic power. Burke 



194 DANIEL WEBSTEU 

depicted with all the ardor of his nature and with 
a wealth of color a great invasion which swept 
thousands to destruction. Webster's theme was 
a cold-blooded murder in a quiet New England 
town. Comparison between such topics, when 
one is so infinitely larger than the other, seems at 
first sight almost impossible. But Mr. Webster 
also dealt with the workings of the human heart 
under the influence of the most terrible passions, 
and those have furnished sufficient material for 
the genius of Shakespeare. The test of excellence 
is in the treatment, and in this instance Mr. Web- 
ster has never been excelled. The effect of that 
exordium, delivered as he alone could have deliv- 
ered it, must have been appalling. He was ac- 
cused of having been brought into the case to 
hurr}^ the jury beyond the law and evidence, and 
his whole speech was certainly calculated to drive 
any body of men, terror-stricken by his eloquence, 
wherever he wished them to go. Mr. Webster 
did not have that versatility and variety of elo- 
quence which we associate with the speakers who 
have produced the most startling effect upon that 
complex thing called a jury. He never showed 
that rapid alternation of wit, humor, pathos, in- 
vective, sublimity, and ingenuity which have been 
characteristic of the greatest advocates. Before a 
jury as everywhere else he was direct and simple. 
He awed and terrified jurymen; he convinced their 
reason ; but he commanded rather than persuaded, 
and carried them with him by sheer force of elo- 



THE REPLY TO IIAYNE 195 

quence and argument, and by his overpowering 
personality. 

The extravagant admiration which Mr. Webster 
excited among his followers has undoubtedly exag- 
gerated his greatness in many respects; but, high 
as the praise bestowed upon him as an orator has 
been, in that direction at least he has certainly 
not been overestimated. The reverse rather is 
true. Mr. Webster was, of course, the greatest 
orator this country has ever produced. Patrick 
Henry's fame rests wholly on tradition. The same 
is true of Hamilton, who, moreover, never had an 
opportunity adequate to his talents, which were 
unquestionably of the first order. Fisher Ames's 
reputation was due to a single speech which is 
distinctly inferior to many of Webster's. Clay's 
oratory has not stood the test of time ; his speeches, 
which were so wonderfully effective when he ut- 
tered them, seem dead and cold and rather thin 
as we read them to-day. Calhoun was a great 
debater, but was too dry and hard for the highest 
eloquence. John Quincy Adams, despite his phy- 
sical limitations, carried the eloquence of combat 
and bitter retort to the highest point in the splen- 
did battles of his congressional career, but his 
learning, readiness, power of expression, argiiment, 
and scathing sarcasm were not rounded into a per- 
fect whole by the more graceful attributes which 
also form an essential part of oratory. 

Mr. Webster need not fear comparison with any 
of his countrymen, and he has no reason to shun 



196 DANIEL WEBSTER 

it with the greatest masters of speech in England. 
lie had much of the grandeur of Cliatham, with 
whom it is impossible to compare him or indeed 
any one else, for the Great Commoner lives only 
in fragments of doubtful accuracy. Sheridan was 
universally considered to have made the most splen- 
did speech of his day. Yet the speech on the Be- 
gums as given by Moore does not cast Webster's 
best work at all into the shade. Webster did not 
have Sheridan's brilliant wit, but on the other 
hand he was never forced, never involved, never 
guilty of ornament, which fastidious judges would 
now pronounce tawdry. W^ebster's best speeches 
read much better than anything of Sheridan, and, 
so far as we can tell from careful descriptions, his 
manner, look, and delivery were far more impos- 
ing. The "manly eloquence" of Fox seems to 
have resembled Webster's more closely than that 
of any other of his English rivals. Fox was more 
fertile, more brilliant, more surprising than W^eb- 
ster, and had more quickness and dash, and a 
<rreater ease and charm of manner. But he was 
often careless, and sometimes fell into repetitions, 
from which, of course, no great speaker can be 
wholly free any more than he can keep entirely 
clear of commonplaces. Webster gained upon him 
by superior finish and by greater weight of argu- 
ment. Before a jury Webster fell behind Er- 
skine as he did behind Choate, although neither 
of them ever produced anything at all comparable 
to the speech on the White murder; but in the 



THE REPLY TO HAYNE 197 

Senate, and in the general field of oratory, he 
rises high above them both. The man with whom 
Webster is oftenest compared, and the last to be 
mentioned, is of course Burke. It may be con- 
ceded at once that in creative imagination, and in 
richness of imagery and language, Burke ranks 
above Webster. But no one would ever have 
said of Webster as Goldsmith did of Burke : — 

" Who, too deep for his hearers, still went on refining. 

And thought of convincing while they thought of dining." 

Webster never sinned by over refinement or over 
ingenuity, for both were utterly foreign to his 
nature. StiU less did he impair his power in the 
Senate as Burke did in the Commons by talking 
too often and too much. If he did not have the 
extreme beauty and grace of which Burke was 
capable, he was more forcible and struck harder 
and more weighty blows. He was greatly aided 
in this by his brief and measured periods, and his 
strength was never wasted in long and elaborate 
sentences. Webster, moreover, would never have 
degenerated into the ranting excitement which led 
Burke to draw a knife from his bosom and cast it 
on the floor of the House. This illustrates what 
was, perhaps, Mr. Webster's very strongest point, 
— his absolute good taste. He may have been 
ponderous at times in his later years. We know 
that he was occasionally heavy, pompous, and even 
dull, but he never violated the rules of the nicest 
taste. Other men have been more versatile, pos- 
sessed of a richer imagination and more gorgeous 



198 DANIEL WEBSTER 

style, with a more brilliant wit and a keener sar- 
casm, but there is not one who is so absolutely 
free from faults of taste as Webster, or who is so 
uniformly simple and pure in thought and style, 
even to the point of severity.^ 

It is easy to compare Mr. AVebster with this 
and the other great orator, and to select i)oints of 
resemblance and of difference, and show where 
Mr. Webster was superior and where he fell be- 
hind. But the final verdict must be upon all his 
qualities taken together. He had the most ex- 
traordinary physical gifts of face, form, and voice, 
and employed them to the best advantage. Thus 
equipped, he delivered a long series of great 
speeches which can be read to-day with the deep- 
est interest, instruction, and pleasure. He had 
dignity, grandeur, and force, a strong historic im- 
agination, and great dramatic power when he chose 
to exert it. He possessed an unerring taste, a 
capacity for vigorous and telling sarcasm, a glow 
and fire none the less intense because they were 
subdued, perfect clearness of statement joined to 
the highest skill in argument, and he was master 
of a style which was as forcible as it was simple 
and pure. Take him for all in all, he was not 

^ A volume might be written comparing Mr. Webster -with 
other groat orators. Only the briefest and most rudimentary 
treatment of the subject is possible here. A more excellent study 
of the comparative excellence of Webster's eloquence has been 
made by Judge Chamberlain, librarian of the Boston Public 
Library, in a speech at the dinner of the Dartmouth Alumni, 
which has since been printed as a pamphlet. 



THE REPLY TO HAYNE 199 

only the greatest orator this country has ever 
known, but in the history of eloquence his name 
will stand with those of Demosthenes and Cicero, 
of Chatham and Burke. 



CHAPTER VII 

THE STRUGGLE WITH JACKSON AND THE RISE OF 

THE WHIG PARTY 

In the year preceding the delivery of his great 
speech Mr. Webster had lost his brother Ezekiel 
by sudden death, and he had married for his sec- 
ond wife Miss Leroy of New York. The former 
event was a terrible grief to him, and taken in 
conjunction with the latter seemed to make a com- 
plete break with the past, and with its struggles 
and privations, its joys and successes. The slen- 
der girl whom he had married in Salisbury church 
and the beloved brother were both gone, and with 
them went those years of youth in which, — 

" He had sighed deep, laughed free, 
Starved, feasted, despaired, been happy." 

One cannot come to this dividing line in Mr. 
Webster's life without refrret. There was enough 
of brilliant achievement and substantial success in 
what had gone before to satisfy any man, and it 
had been honest, simple, and unaffected. A wider 
fame and a greater name lay before him, but with 
them came also ugly scandals, bitter personal at- 
tacks, an ambition which warped his nature, and 



THE STRUGGLE WITH JACKSON 201 

finally a terrible mistake. One feels inclined to 
say of these later years, with the Eoman lover : — 

" Shut them in 
With their triumplis and their glories and the rest, 
Love is best." 

The home changed first, and then the public 
career. The reply which, as John Quincy Adams 
said, "utterly demolished the fabric of Hayne's 
speech and left scarcely a wreck to be seen," went 
straight home to the people of the North. It gave 
eloquent expression to the strong but undefined 
feeling in the popular mind. It found its way 
into every house and was read everywhere; it took 
its place in the school books, to be repeated by 
shriU boy voices, and became part of the literature 
and of the intellectual life of the country. In 
those solemn sentences men read the description 
of what the United States had come to be under 
the Constitution, and what American nationality 
meant in 1830. The leaders of the young war 
party in 1812 were the first to arouse the national 
sentiment, but no one struck the chord with such 
a master hand as Mr. Webster, or drew forth such 
long and deep vibrations. There is no single ut- 
terance in our history which has done so much by 
mere force of words to strengthen the love of 
nationality and implant it deeply in the popular 
heart, as the reply to Ilayne. 

Before the delivery of that speech Mr. Webster 
was a distinguished statesman, but the day after 
he awoke to a national fame which made all his 



202 DANIEL WEBSTER 

other triumphs pale. Such fame brought with it, 
of course, as it alwaj^s does in this country, talk 
of the presidency. The reply to Hayne made Mr. 
Webster a presidential candidate, and from that 
moment he was never free from the gnawing, 
haunting ambition to win the grand prize of Amer- 
ican public life. There was a new force in his 
career, and in all the years to come the influence 
of that force must be reckoned and remembered. 

Mr. Webster was anxious that the party of op- 
po.>^ition to General Jackson, which then passed 
by the name of National Republicans, should be 
in some way strengthened, solidified, and placed 
on a broad platform of distinct principles. He 
saw with great regret the ruin which was threat- 
ened by the anti-masonic schism, and it would 
seem that he was not indisposed to take advantage 
of this to stop the nomination of Mr. Clay, who 
was peculiarly objectionable to the opponents of 
masonry. He earnestly desired the nomination 
himself, but even his own friends in the party 
told him that this was out of the question, and he 
acquiesced in their decision. Mr. Clay's personal 
popularity, moreover, among the National Repub- 
licans was, in truth, invincible, and he was unani- 
mously nominated by the convention at Baltimore. 
The action of the an ti -masonic element in the 
country doomed Clay to defeat, which he was likely 
enough to encounter in any event ; but the consoli- 
dation of the party so ardently desired by Mr. 
Webster was brought about by acts of the admin- 



thp: struggle with jackson 203 

istratioii, wliicli completely overcame any intestine 
divisions among its opponents. 

The session of 1831-1832, when the country 
was preparing for the coming presidential election, 
marks the beginning of the fierce struggle with 
Andrew Jackson which was to give birth to a new 
and powerful organization known in our history as 
the Whig party, and destined, after years of con- 
flict, to bring overwhelming defeat to the " Jack- 
sonian democracy." There is no occasion here to 
enter into a history of the famous bank contro- 
versy. Established in 1816, the Bank of the 
United States, after a period of difficulties, had 
become a powerful and valuable financial organi- 
zation. In 1832 it applied for a continuance of 
its charter, which then had three years still to run. 
Mr. Webster did not enter into tlie personal con- 
test which had already begun, but in a speech of 
o-reat ability advocated a renewal of the charter, 
showing, as he always did on such themes, a know- 
ledge and a grasp of the principles and intricacies 
of public finance unequaled in our history except 
by Hamilton. In a second speech he made a most 
effective and powerful argument against a propo- 
sition to give the States authority to tax the 
bank, defending the doctrines laid down by Chief 
Justice Marshall in McCullough v. Maryland, 
and denying the power of Congress to give tlie 
States the right of such taxation, because by so 
doing they violated the Constitution. The amend- 
ment was defeated, and the bill for the continu- 



204 DANIEL WEBSTER 

ance of the charter passed both houses by large 
majorities. 

Jackson returned the bill with a veto. He had 
the audacity to rest his veto upon the ground that 
the bill was unconstitutional, and that it was the 
duty of the President to decide upon the constitu- 
tionality of every measure without feeling in the 
least bound by the opinion of Congress or of the 
Supreme Court. His ignorance was so crass that 
he failed to perceive the distinction between a new 
bill and one to continue an existing law, while his 
vanity and his self-assumption were so colossal 
that he did not hesitate to assert that he had the 
right and the power to declare an existing law, 
passed by Congress, approved by Madison, and 
held to be constitutional by an express decision 
of the Supreme Court, to be invalid, because he 
thought fit to say so. To overthrow such doctrines 
was not difficult, but Mr. Webster refuted them 
with a completeness and force which were irresisti- 
ble. At the same time he avoided personal attack 
in the dignified way which was characteristic of 
him, despite the extraordinary temptation to in- 
dulire in invective and teUinof sarcasm to which 
Jackson by his ignorance and presumption had so 
exposed himself. The bill was lost, the great con- 
flict with the bank was begun, and the Whig party 
was founded. 

Another event of a different character, which 
had occurred not long before, helped to widen the 
breach and to embitter the contest between the 




<^^^^-^if^5225^ 



THE STRUGGLE WITH JACKSON 205 

parties of the administration and of the opposition. 
When in 1829 Mr. McLane had received his in- 
structions as minister to England, he had been 
directed by Mr. Van Buren to reopen negotiations 
on the subject of the West Indian trade, and in 
so doing the secretary of state had reflected on the 
previous administration, and had said that the 
party in power would not support the pretensions 
of its predecessors. Such language was, of course, 
at variance with all traditions, was wholly im- 
proper, and was mean and contemptible in dealing 
with a foreign nation. In 1831 Mr. Van Buren 
was nominated as minister to England, and came 
up for confirmation in the Senate some time after 
he had actually departed on his mission. Mr. 
Webster opposed the confirmation in an eloquent 
speech full of just pride in his country and of vig- 
orous indignation against the slight which Mr. 
Van Buren had put upon her by his instructions 
to Mr. McLane. He pronounced a splendid ''re- 
buke upon the first instance in which an American 
minister had been sent abroad as the representa- 
tive of his party and not as the representative of 
his country." The opposition was successful, and 
Mr. Van Buren 's nomination was rejected. It is 
no doubt true that the rejection was a political 
mistake, and that, as was commonly said at the 
time, it created sympathy for Mr. Van Buren and 
insured his succession to the presidency. Yet no 
one would now think so well of Mr. Webster if, 
to avoid awakening popular sympathy and party 



20C DANIEL WEBSTER 

enthusiasm in behalf of Mr. Van Buren, he had 
silently voted for that gentleman's confirmation. 
To do so was to approve the despicable tone adopted 
in the instructions to McLane. As a patriotic 
American, above all as a man of intense national 
feelings, Mr. Webster could not have done other- 
wise than resist with all the force of his eloquence 
the confirmation of a man who had made such an 
undignified and unworthy exhibition of partisan- 
ship. Politically he may have been wrong, but 
morally he was wholly right, and his rebuke stands 
in our history as a reproach which Mr. Van Bu- 
ren 's subsequent success can neither mitigate nor 
impair. 

There was another measure, however, which 
had a far different effect from those which tended 
to build up the opposition to Jackson and his fol- 
lowers. A movement was begun by Mr. Clay 
looking to a revision and reduction of the tariff, 
which finally resulted in a bill reducing duties on 
many articles to a revenue standard, and leaving 
those on cotton and woolen goods and iron un- 
changed. In the debates which occurred during 
the passage of this bill Mr. Webster took but lit- 
tle part, but they caused a furious outbreak on 
the part of the South Carolinians led by HajTie, 
and ended in the confirmation of the protective 
policy. When Mr. Webster spoke at the New 
York dinner in 1831, he gave his hearers to un- 
derstand very clearly that the nullification agita- 
tion was not at an end, and after the passage of 



THE STRUGGLE WITH JACKSON 207 

the new tariff bill he saw close at hand the danger 
which he had predicted. 

In November, 1832, South Carolina in conven- 
tion passed her famous ordinance nullifying the 
revenue laws of the United States, and her legis- 
lature, which assembled soon after, enacted laws 
to carry out the ordinance, and gave an open defi- 
ance to the Federal government. The country 
was filled with excitement. It was known that 
Mr. Calhoun, having published a letter in defense 
of nullification, had resigned the vice-presidency, 
accepted the senatorship of South Carolina, and 
was coming to the capital to advocate his favorite 
doctrine. But the South Carolinians had made 
one trifling blunder. They had overlooked the 
President. Jackson was a Southerner and a De- 
mocrat, but he was also the head of the nation, 
and determined to maintain its integrity. On 
December 10, before Congress assembled, he is- 
sued his famous proclamation in which he took up 
vigorously the position adopted by Mr. Webster 
in his reply to Hayne, and gave the South Caro- 
linians to understand that he would not endure 
treason, but would enforce constitutional laws even 
though he should be compelled to use bayonets to 
do it. The legislature of the recalcitrant State 
replied in an offensive manner wdiich only served 
to make Jackson angry. He, too, began to say 
some pretty violent tilings, and, as he generally 
meant what he said, the gallant leaders of nulliti- 
cation and other worthy people grew very uneasy. 



208 DANIEL WEBSTER 

There can be no doubt that the outlook was very 
threatening, and the nullifiers were extremely likely 
to be the first to suffer from the effects of the im- 
pending storm. 

Mr. Webster was in New Jersey, on his way to 
Washington, when he first received the proclama- 
tion, and at Philadelphia he met Mr. Clay, and 
from a friend of that gentleman received a copy of 
a bill which was to do away wdth the tariff by 
gradual reductions, prevent the imposition of any 
further duties, and which at the same time declared 
against protection and in favor of a tariff for reve- 
nue only. This headlong plunge into concession 
and compromise was not at all to Mr. Webster's 
taste. He was opposed to the scheme for economi- 
cal reasons, but still more on the far higher ground 
that there was open resistance to laws of undoubted 
constitutionality, and until that resistance was 
crushed under foot any talk of compromise was 
a blow at the national dignity and the national 
existence which ought not to be tolerated for an 
instant. His own course was plain. He proposed 
to sustain the administration, and when the na- 
tional honor should be vindicated and all uncon- 
stitutional resistance ended, then w^ould come the 
time for concessions. Jackson w^as not slow in 
giving Mr. Webster something to support. At 
the opening of the session a message was sent to 
Congress asking that provision might be made to 
enable the President to enforce the laws by means 
of the land and naval forces if necessary. The 



THE STRUGGLE WITH JACKSON 209 

message was referred to a committee, who at once 
reported the celebrated "Force Bill," which em- 
bodied the principles of the message and had the 
entire approval of the President. But Jackson's 
party broke, despite the attitude of their chief, 
for many of them were from the South and could 
not bring themselves to the point of accepting the 
Force Bill. The moment was critical, and the 
administration turned to Mr. Webster and took 
him into their councils. On February 8 Mr. 
Webster rose, and, after explaining in a fashion 
which no one was likely to forget, that this was 
wholly an administration measui'e, he announced 
his intention, as an independent senator, of giving 
it his hearty and inflexible support. The combi- 
nation thus effected was overwhelming. Mr. Cal- 
houn was now thoroughly alarmed, and we can 
well imagine that the threats of hanging, in which 
it was rumored that the President had indulged, 
began to have a good deal of practical significance 
to a gentleman who, as secretary of war, had been 
familiar with the circumstances attending the deaths 
of Arbuthnot and Ambrister. At all events, Mr. 
Calhoun lost no time in having an interview with 
Mr. Clay, and the result was that the latter, on 
February 11, announced that he should, on the 
following day, introduce a tariff bill, a measure of 
the same sort having already been started in the 
House. The bill as introduced did not involve 
such a complete surrender as that which Mr. Web- 
ster had seen in Philadelphia, but it necessitated 



210 DANIEL WEBSTER 

most extensive modifications and gave all that 
South Carolina could reasonably demand. Mr. 
Clay advocated it in a brilliant speech, resting his 
defense on the ground that this was the only way 
to preserve the tariff, and that it was founded on 
the great constitutional doctrine of compromise. 
Mr. Webster opposed the bill briefly, and then 
introduced a series of resolutions combating the 
proposed measure on economical principles and on 
those of justice, and especially assailing the readi- 
ness to abandon the rightful powers of Congress 
and yield them up to any form of resistance. 
Before, however, he could speak in support of his 
resolutions, the Force Bill came up, and Mr. 
Calhoun made his celebrated argument in support 
of nullification. This Mr. Webster was obliged 
to answer, and he replied with the great speech 
known in his works as "The Constitution not a 
compact between sovereign States." In a general 
way the same criticism is applicable to this debate 
as to that with Hayne, but there were some impor- 
tant differences. Mr. Calhoun's argument was 
superior to that of his follower. It was dry and 
hard, but it was a splendid specimen of close and 
ingenious reasoning, and, as was to be expected, 
the originator and master surpassed the imitator 
and pupil. Mr. Webster's speech, on the other 
hand, in respect to eloquence, was decidedly infe- 
rior to the masterpiece of 1830. Mr. Curtis says: 
"Perhaps there is no speech ever made by Mr. 
Webster that is so close in its reasoning, so com- 



THE STRUGGLE WITH JACKSON 211 

pact, and so powerful/' To the first two qualities 
we can readily assent, but that it was equally pow- 
erful may be doubted. So long as Mr. Webster 
confined himself to defending the Constitution as 
it actually was and as what it had come to mean 
in point of fact, he was invincible. Just in pro- 
portion as he left this ground and attempted to 
argue on historical premises that it was a funda- 
mental law, he weakened his position, for the his- 
torical facts were against him. In the reply to 
Hayne he touched but slightly on the historical, 
legal, and theoretical aspects of the case, and he 
was overwhelming. In the reply to Calhoun he 
devoted his strength chiefly to these topics, and, 
meeting his keen antagonist on the latter 's own 
chosen ground, he put himself at a disadvantage. 
In the actual present and in the steady course of 
development, the facts were wholly with Mr. Web- 
ster. Whatever the people of the United States 
understood the Constitution to mean in 1789, there 
can be no question that a majority in 1833 re- 
garded it as a fundamental law, and not as a com- 
pact — an opinion which has now become universal. 
But it was quite another thing to argue that what 
the Constitution had come to mean was what it 
meant when it was adopted. The identity of mean- 
ing at these two periods was the proposition which 
Mr. Webster undertook to maintain, and he up- 
held it as well and as plausibly as the nature of 
the case admitted. His reasoning was close and 
vigorous; but he could not destroy the theory of 



212 DANIEL WEBSTER 

the Constitution as held by leaders and people in 
1789, or reconcile the Virginia and Kentucky reso- 
lutions or tlie Hartford Convention with the fun- 
damental-law doctrines. Nevertheless, it would 
be an error to suppose that because the facts of 
history were against Mr. Webster in these particu- 
lars, this able, ingenious, and elaborate argument 
was thrown away. It was a fitting supplement 
and complement to the reply to Ilayne. It reiter- 
ated the national principles, and furnished those 
whom the statement and demonstration of an exist- 
ing fact could not satisfy with an immense maga- 
zine of lucid reasoning and plausible and eifective 
arguments. The reply to Hayne gave magnificent 
expression to the popular feeling, while that to 
Calhoun supplied the arguments which, after years 
of discussion, converted that feeling into a fixed 
opinion, and made it strong enough to carry the 
North through four years of civil war. But in 
his final speech in this debate Mr. Webster came 
back to his original ground, and said, in conclu- 
sion, " Shall we have a general government ? Shall 
we continue the union of States under a government 
instead of a league ? This vital and all-important 
question the people will decide." The vital ques- 
tion went to the great popular jury, and they cast 
aside all historical premises and deductions, all 
legal subtleties and refinements, and gave their 
verdict on the existing facts. The world knows 
what that verdict was, and will never forget that 
it was largely due to the splendid eloquence of 



THE STRUGGLE WITH JACKSON 213 

Daniel Webster when he defended the cause of 
nationality against the slaveholding separatists of 
South Carolina. 

While this great debate was in progress, and 
Mr. Webster and the faithfid adherents of Jack- 
son were pushing the Force Bill to a vote, Mr. 
Clay was making every effort to carry the compro- 
mise tariff. In spite of his exertions, the Force 
BiU passed on February 20, but close behind came 
the tariff, which Mr. W^ebster opposed, on its final 
passage, in a vigorous speech. There is no need 
to enter into his economical objections, but he 
made his strongest stand against the policy of 
sacrificing great interests to soothe South Caro- 
lina. Mr. Clay replied, but did not then press a 
vote, for, with that dexterous management which 
lie had exhibited in 1820 and was again to dis- 
play in 1850, he had succeeded in getting his tariff 
bill carried rapidly through the House, in order 
to obviate the objection that all money bills must 
originate in the lower branch. The House biU 
pas^sed the Senate, Mr. Webster voting against 
it, and became law. There was no further need 
of the Force Bill. Clay, Calhoun, even the daring 
Jackson ultimately, were very glad to accept the 
easy escape offered by a compromise. South Caro- 
lina had in reality prevailed, although Mr. Clay 
had saved protection in a modified form. Her 
threats of nullification had brought the United 
States government to terms, and the doctrines of 
Calhoun went home to the people of the South 



214 DANIEL WEBSTER 

with the glory of substantial victory about tliera, 
to breed auJ foster separatism and secession, and 
prepare the way for armed conflict with the nobler 
spirit of nationality which Mr. Webster had roused 
in the North. 

Speaking of Mr. Webster at this ])eriod, Mr. 
Benton says : — 

" He was the colossal figure on the political stage 
during that eventful time, and his labors, splendid in 
their day, survive for the benefit of distant posterity." 
..." It was a splendid era in his life, both for his in- 
tellect and his patriotism. No longer the advocate of 
classes or interests, he appeared as the great defender 
of the Union, of the Constitution, of the country, and of 
the administration to which he was opposed. Released 
from the bonds of party and the narrow confines of class 
and corporation advocacy, his colossal intellect expanded 
to its fuU proportions in the field of patriotism, luminous 
with the fires of genius, and commanding the homage 
not of party but of country. His magnificent harangues 
touched Jackson in his deepest-seated and ruhng feeling, 
love of country, and brought forth the response which 
always came from him when the country was in peril 
and a defender presented himself. He threw out the 
right hand of fellowship, treated Mr. Webster with 
marked distinction, commended liim with public praise, 
and placed him on the roll of patriots. And the public 
mind took the belief that they were to act together in 
future, and that a cabinet appohitnient or a high mis- 
sion would be the reward of his patriotic service. It 
was a crisis in the life of Mr. Webster. He stood in 
public opposition to Mr. Clay and Mr. Calhoun. W^ith 



THE STRUGGLE WITH JACKSON 215 

Mr. Clay he had a public outbreak in the Senate. He 
was cordial witli Jackson. The mass of his party stood 
by him on the proclamation. He was at a point from 
which a new departure might be taken : one at which he 
could not stand still ; from which there must be either 
advance or recoil. It was a case in which will more 
than intellect was to rule. He was above Mr. Clay and 
Mr. Calhoun in intellect, below them in will : and he was 
soon seen cooperating with them (Mr. Clay in the lead) 
in the great measure condemning President Jackson." 

This is of course the view of a Jacksonian leader, 
but it is none the less full of keen analysis and 
comprehension of Mr. Webster, and in some re- 
spects embodies very well the conditions of the 
situation. Mr. Benton naturally did not see that 
an alliance with Jackson was utterly impossible 
for Mr. Webster, whose proper course was there- 
fore much less simple than it appeared to the sen- 
ator from Missouri. There was in reality no com- 
mon ground possible between Webster and Jackson 
except defense of the national integrity. Mr. 
Webster was a great orator, a splendid advocate, 
a trained statesman and economist, a remarkable 
constitutional lawyer, and a man of immense dig- 
nity, not headstrong in temper, and without pe- 
culiar force of will. Jackson, on the other hand, 
was a rude soldier, unlettered, intractable, arbi- 
trary, with a violent temper and a most despotic 
will. Two men more utterly incompatible it would 
have been difficult to find, and nothing could have 
been more wildly fantastic than to suppose an 



216 DANIEL WEBSTER 

alliance between them, or to imagine that Mr. 
Webster could ever have done anything but oppose 
utterly those mad gyrations of personal govern- 
ment which the President called his "policy." 

Yet at the same time it is perfectly true that 
just after the passage of the tariff bill ]\Ir. Web- 
ster was at a great crisis in his life. He coidd 
not act with Jackson. That way was shut to him 
by nature, if by nothing else. But he could have 
maintained his position as the independent and 
unbending defender of nationality and as the foe 
of compromise. He might then have brought Mr. 
Clay to his side, and remained himself the undis- 
puted head of the Whig party. The coalition be- 
tween Clay and Calhoun was a hollow, ill-omened 
thing, certain to go violently to pieces, as, in fact, 
it did, within a few years, and then Mr. Clay, if 
he had held out so long, would have been helpless 
without Mr. Webster. But such a course required 
a very strong will and great tenacity of purpose, 
and it was on this side that Mr. Webster was 
weak, as Mr. Benton points out. Instead of wait- 
ing for Mr. Clay to come to him, Mr. Webster 
went over to Clay and Calhoun, and formed for 
a time the third in that ill-assorted partnership. 
There was no reason for his doing so. In fact 
every good reason was against it. Mr. Clay had 
come to Mr. Webster with his compromise, and 
had been met with the reply "that it would be 
yielding great principles to faction ; and that the 
time had come to test the strength of the Consti- 



THE STRUGGLE WITH JACKSON 217 

tution and the government." This wiis a hrave, 
manly answer, l)ut Mr. Clay, nationalist as lie 
was, had straightway deserted his friend and ally, 
and gone over to the separatist for sn})})ort. Then 
a sharp contest had occnrred between Mr. Web- 
ster and Mr. Clay in tlie debate on the tariff; 
and when it was all over, the latter wrote with 
frank vanity and a slight tinge of contempt : " Mr. 
Webster and I came in conflict, and I have the 
satisfaction to tell you that he gained nothing. 
My friends flatter me with my having completely 
triumphed. There is no permanent breach be- 
tween us. I think he begins already to repent his 
course." Mr. Clay was intensely national, but 
his theory of preserving the Union was by contin- 
ual compromise, or, in other words, by constant 
yielding to the aggressive South. Mr. Webster's 
plan was to maintain a firm attitude, enforce abso- 
lute submission to all constitutional laws, and prove 
that agitation against the Union could lead only 
to defeat. This policy would not have resulted in 
rebellion, but, if it had, the hanging of Calhoun 
and a few like him, and the military government 
of South Carolina, by the hero of New Orleans, 
would have taught slaveholders such a lesson that 
w^e should probably have been spared four years 
of civil war. Peaceful submission, however, would 
have been the sure outcome of Mr. Webster's 
policy. But a compromise appealed as it always 
does to the timid, balance-of-power party. Mr. 
Clay prevailed, and the manufacturers of New 



218 DANIEL WEBSTER 

England, as well as elsewhere, finding that he had 
secured for them the hencfit of time and of tlie 
chapter of accidents, rapidly came over to his sup- 
port. The pressure was too much for Mr. Web- 
ster. Mr. Clay thought that if Mr. Webster ''had 
to go over the work of the last few weeks he would 
have been for the compromise, which commands 
the approbation of a great majority." Whether 
Mr. Webster repented his opposition to the com- 
promise no one can say, but the change of opinion 
in New England, the general assent of the Whig 
party, and the dazzling temptations of presidential 
candidacy prevailed with him. He fell in behind 
Mr. Clay, and remained there in a party sense 
and as a party man for the rest of his life. 

The terrible prize of the presidency was indeed 
again before his eyes. Mr. Clay's overthrow at 
the previous election had removed him, for the 
time being at least, from the list of candidates, 
and thus freed Mr. Webster from his most dan- 
gerous rival. In the summer of 1833 Mr. Web- 
ster made a tour through the Western States, and 
was received everj^where with enthusiasm, and 
hailed as the great expounder and defender of the 
Constitution. The following winter he stood for- 
ward as the preeminent champion of the Bank 
against the President. Everything seemed to point 
to him as the natural candidate of the opposition. 
The legislature of Massachusetts nominated him 
for the presidency, and he himself deeply desired 
the office, for the fever now burned strongly within 



THE STRUGGLE WITH JACKSON 219 

him. But tlie movement came to nothing. The 
anti-masonic schism still distracted the opposition. 
The Kentucky leaders were jealous of Mr. Web- 
ster, and thought him "no such man " as their idol 
Henry Clay. They admitted liis greatness and 
his high traits of character, but they thought his 
ambition mixed with too much self-love. Gov- 
ernor Letcher wrote to Mr. Crittenden in 1836 
that Clay was more elevated, disinterested, and 
patriotic than Webster, and that the verdict of 
the country had had a good effect on the latter. 
Despite the interest and enthusiasm which Mr. 
Webster aroused in the West, he had no real hold 
upon that section or upon the masses of the peo- 
ple, and the Western Whigs turned to Harrison. 
There was no hope, in 1836 for Mr. Webster, or, 
for that matter, for his party either. He received* 
the electoral vote of faithful Massachusetts, and 
that was all. As it was then, so it had been at 
the previous election, and so it was to continue to 
be at the end of every presidential term. There 
never was a moment when Mr. Webster had any 
real prospect of attaining to the presidency. Un- 
fortunately he never could realize this. He would 
have been more than human, perhaps, if he had 
done so. The tempting bait hung always before 
his eyes. The prize seemed to be always just 
coming within his reach and was really never near 
it. But the longing had entered his soul. He 
could not rid himself of the idea of this final cul- 
mination to his success ; and it warped his feelings 



220 DANIEL WEBSTER 

and actions, injured liis career, and embittered bis 
last years. 

Tliis notice of the presidential election of 183G 
has somewhat anticipated the course of events. 
Soon after the tariff compromise had been effected, 
Mr. Webster renewed his relations with Mr. Clay, 
and, consequently, with Mr. Calhoun, and their 
redoubtable antagonist in the President's chair 
soon gave them enough to do. The most immedi- 
ate obstacle to Mr. Webster's alliance with Gen- 
eral Jackson was the latter 's attitude in regard to 
the bank. Mr. Webster had become satisfied that 
the bank was, on the wliole, a useful and even 
necessary institution. No one was better fitted 
than he to decide on such a question, and few per- 
sons would now be found to differ from his judg- 
ment on this point. In a general way he may be 
said to have adopted the Hamilton ian doctrine in 
regard to the expediency and constitutionality of 
a national bank. There were intimations in the 
spring of 1833 that the President, not content 
with preventing the re -charter of the bank, was 
planning to strike it down, and practically deprive 
it of even the three years of life which still re- 
mained to it by law. The scheme was perfected 
during the summer, and, after changing his secre- 
tary of the treasury until he got one who w^ould 
obey, President Jackson dealt his great blow. On 
September 26 Mr. Taney signed the order remov- 
ing the deposits of the government from the Bank 
of the United States. The result was an immedi- 



THE STRUGGLE WITH JACKSON 221 

ate contraction of loans, commercial distress, and 
great confusion. 

The President had thrown down the gage, and 
the leaders of the opposition were not slow to take 
it up. Mr. Clay opened the battle by introducing 
two resolutions, — one condemning the action of 
the President as unconstitutional, the other attack- 
ing the policy of removal, and a long and bitter 
debate ensued. A month later, Mr. Webster came 
forward with resolutions from Boston against the 
course of the President. He presented the resolu- 
tions in a powerful and effective speech, depicting 
the deplorable condition of business and the in- 
jury caused to the country by the removal of the 
deposits. Pie rejected the idea of leaving the 
currency to the control of the President, or of do- 
ing away entirely with paper, and advocated the 
re -charter of the present bank, or the creation of 
a new one; and, until the time for that should 
arrive, the return of the deposits, with its conse- 
quent relief to business and a restoration of stabil- 
ity and of confidence for the time being at least. 
He soon found that the administration had deter- 
mined that no law should be passed, and that the 
doctrine that Congress had no power to establish 
a bank should be upheld. He also discovered 
that the constitutional pundit in the White House, 
who was so opposed to a single national bank, had 
created, by his own fiat, a large number of small 
national banks in the guise of state banks, to 
which the public deposits were committed, and the 



222 DANIEL WEBSTER 

collection of the public revenues intrusted. Such 
an arbitrary policy, at once so ignorant, illogical, 
and dangerous, aroused Mr. Webster thoroughly, 
and he entered immediately upon an active cam- 
paign against the President. Between the presen- 
tation of the Boston resolutions and the close of 
the session he spoke on the bank, and the subjects 
necessarily connected with it, no less than sixty - 
four times. He dealt entirely with financial top- 
ics, — chiefly those relating to the currency, and 
with the constitutional questions raised by the 
extension of the executive authority. This long 
series of speeches is one of the most remarkable 
exhibitions of intellectual power ever made by 
Mr. Webster, or indeed by any public man in our 
history. In discussing one subject in all its bear- 
ings, involving of necessity a certain amount of 
repetition, he not only displayed an extraordinary 
grasp of complicated financial problems and a wide 
knowledge of their scientific meaning and history, 
but he showed an astonishing fertility in argu- 
ment, coupled with great variety and clearness of 
statement and cogency of reasoning. With the 
exception of Hamilton, Mr. Webster is the only 
statesman in our history who was capable of such 
a performance on such a subject, when a thorough 
knowledge had to be united with all the resources 
of debate and all the arts of the highest eloquence. 
The most important speech of all was that deliv- 
ered in answer to Jackson's *' Protest," sent in as 
a reply to Mr. Clay's resolutions which had been 



THE STRUGGLE WITH JACKSON 223 

sustained by Mr. Webster as chairman of the 
Committee on Finance. The "Protest" asserted, 
in brief, that the Legislature could not order a 
subordinate officer to perform certain duties free 
from the control of the President; that the Presi- 
dent had the right to put his own conception of 
the law into execution ; and, if the subordinate 
officer refused to obey, then to remove such officer; 
and that the Senate had therefore no right to cen- 
sure his removal of the secretary of the treasury, 
in order to reach the government deposits. To 
this doctrine Mr. Webster replied with great elab- 
oration and ability. The question was a very nice 
one. There could be no doubt of the President's 
power of removal, and it was necessary to show 
that this power did not extend to the point of de- 
priving Congress of the right to confer by law 
specified and independent powers upon an inferior 
officer, or of regulating the tenure of office. To 
establish this proposition in such a way as to take 
it out of the thick and heated atmosphere of per- 
sonal controversy, and put it in a shape to carry 
conviction to the popular understanding, was a 
delicate and difficult task, requiring, in the highest 
degree, lucidity and ingenuity of argument. It 
is not too high praise to say that Mr. Webster 
succeeded entirely. The real contest was for the 
possession of that debatable ground which lies be- 
tween the defined limits of the executive and legis- 
lative departments. The struggle consolidated and 
gave coherence to the Wliig party as representin 






224 DANIEL WEBSTER 

the opposition to executive encroachments. At 
tlie time Jackson, l)y his im|)ei'ious will and mar- 
velous personal poi)ularity, prevailed and obtained 
the acceptance of his doctrines. But the conflict 
has gone on, and the balance of advantage now 
rests perhaps with the legislature. This tendency 
is quite as dangerous as that of which Jackson 
was the exponent. The executive department might 
be crippled; and the influence and power of Con- 
gress, and especiall}^ of the Senate, might become 
far greater than they should be, under the system 
of proportion and balance embodied in the Consti- 
tution. 

At the next session the principal subject of dis- 
cussion was the trouble with France. Irritated at 
the neglect of the French government to provide 
funds for the payment of their debt to us, Jackson 
sent in a message severely criticising them, and 
recommending the passage of a law authorizing 
reprisals on French property. The President and 
his immediate followers were eager for war, Cal- 
houn and his faction regarded the whole question 
as only matter for "an action of assumpsit," while 
Mr. Webster and Mr. Clay desired to avoid hos- 
tilities, but wished the country to maintain a firm 
and dignified attitude. Under the lead of Mr. 
Clay, the recommendation of reprisals was rejected, 
and under that of Mr. Webster a clause smuggled 
into the Fortification Bill to give the President 
three millions to spend as he liked was struck out 
and the bill was subsequently lost. This affair, 



THE STRUGGLE WITH JACKSON 225 

which brought us to the verge of war with France, 
soon blew over, however, and caused only a tem- 
porary ripple, although Mr. Webster's attack on 
the Fortification Bill left a sting: behind. 

In this same session Mr. Webster made an ex- 
haustive speech on the question of executive patron- 
age and the President's power of appointment and 
removal. He now went much farther than in his 
answer to the "Protest," asserting not only the 
right of Congress to fix the tenure of office, but also 
that the power of removal, like the ])ower of ap- 
pointment, was in the President and Senate jointly. 
The speech contained much that was valuable, but 
in its mam doctrine was radically unsoimd. The 
construction of 1789, which decided that the power 
of removal belonged to the President alone, was 
clearly right, and Mr. Webster failed to overthrow 
it. His theory, embodied in a bill which provided 
that the President should state to the Senate, when 
he appointed to a vacancy caused by removal, his 
reasons for such removal, was thoroughly mis- 
chievous. It was more dan onerous than Jackson's 
doctrine, for it tended to take the power of patron- 
age still more from a single and responsible person 
and vest it in a large and therefore wholly irre- 
sponsible body which has always been too much 
inclined to degenerate into an office-broking oli- 
garchy, and thus degrade its high and im})ortant 
functions. Mr. Webster argued his proposition 
with his usual force and pers])icuity, but the speech 
is strongly partisan and exhibits the disposition of 



226 DANIEL WEBSTER 

an advocate to fit the Constitution to his particu- 
lar case, instead of dealing with it on general and 
fundamental principles. 

The session closed with a resolution offered by 
Mr. Benton to expunge the resolutions of censure 
upon the President, which was overwhelmingly 
defeated, and was then laid upon the table, on the 
motion of Mr. Webster. He also took the first 
step to prevent the impending financial disaster 
growing out of the President's course toward the 
bank, by carrying a bill to stop the payment of 
treasury warrants by the deposit banks in current 
bank-notes, and to compel their payment in gold 
and silver. The rejection of Benton's resolutions 
served to embitter the already intense conflict be- 
tween the President and his antagonists, and Mr. 
Webster's bill, while it showed the wisdom of the 
opposition, was powerless to remedy the mischief 
which was afoot. 

In this same year (1835) the independence of 
Texas was achieved, and in the session of 1835-36 
the slavery agitation began its march, which was 
only to terminate on the field of battle and in the 
midst of contending armies. Mr. Webster's ac- 
tion at this time in regard to.this great question, 
which was destined to have such an effect upon his 
career, can be more fitly narrated when we come 
to consider his whole course in regard to slavery 
in connection with the "7th of March" speech. 
The other matters of this session demand but a 
brief notice. The President animadverted in his 



THE STRUGGLE WITH JACKSON 227 

message upon the loss of the Fortification Bill, 
due to the defeat of the three million clause. Mr. 
Webster defended himself most conclusively and 
effectively, and before the session closed the diffi- 
culties with France were practically settled. He 
also gave great attention to the ever-pressing finan- 
cial question, trying to mitigate the evils which 
the rapid accumulation of the public funds was 
threatening to produce. He felt that he was pow- 
erless, that nothing indeed could be done to avert 
the approaching disaster; but he struggled to mod- 
ify its effects and delay its progress. 

Complications increased rapidly during the sum- 
mer. The famous ''Specie Circular," issued by 
the secretary of the treasury without authority of 
law, weakened all banks which did not hold the 
government deposits, forced them to contract their 
loans, and completed the derangement of domestic 
exchange. This grave condition of affairs con- 
fronted Congress when it assembled in December, 
1836. A resolution was introduced to rescind the 
Specie Circular, and Mr. Webster spoke at length 
in the debate, defining the constitutional duties of 
the government toward the regiilation of the cur- 
rency, and discussing in a masterly manner the 
intricate questions of domestic exchanges and the 
excessive circulation of bank-notes. On another 
occasion ho reiterated his belief that a national 
bank was the true remedy for existing ills, but 
that only hard experience could convince the coun- 
try of its necessity. 



228 DANIEL WEBSTER 

At this session the resolution to expunge the 
vote of censure of 1833 was again brought forward 
by Mr. Benton. The Senate had at hist come 
under the sway of the President, and it was clear 
that the resolution would pass. This precious 
scheme belongs to the same category of absurdities 
as the placing Oliver CromwelTs skull on Temple 
Bar, and throwing Robert Blake's body on a dung- 
hill by Charles Stuart and his friends. It was not 
such a mean and cowardly performance as that of 
the heroes of the Restoration, but it was far more 
''childish-foolish." The miserable and ludicrous 
nature of such a proceeding disgusted Mr. Web- 
ster beyond measure. Before the vote was taken 
he made a brief speech which is a perfect model 
of dignified and severe protest against a silly out- 
rage upon the Constitution and upon the rights of 
senators, which he was totally unable to prevent. 
The original censure is part of history. No "black 
lines " can take it out. The expunging resolution, 
which Mr. Curtis justly calls "fantastic and the- 
atrical," is also part of history, and carries with 
it the ineffaceable stigma affixed by Mr.'Webster's 
indignant protest. 

Before the close of the session Mr. Webster 
made up his mind to resign his seat in the Senate. 
He had private interests which demanded his at- 
tention, and he wished to travel both in the United 
States and in Europe. He may well have thought, 
also, that he could add nothing to his fame by 
remaining longer in the Senate. But besides the 



THE STRUGGLE WITH JACKSON 229 

natural craving for rest, it is quite possible that 
he believed that a withdrawal from active and offi- 
cial participation in politics was the best prepara- 
tion for a successful candidacy for the presidency 
in 1840. This certainlv was in his mind in the 
following year (1838), when the rumor was abroad 
that he was again contemplating retirement from 
the Senate ; and it is highly probable that the same 
motive was at bottom the controlling one in 1887. 
But whatever the cause of his wish to resign, the 
opposition of his friends everywhere, and of the 
legislature of Massachusetts, formally and strongly 
expressed, led him to forego his purpose. He 
consented to hold his seat for the present, at least, 
and in the summer of 1837 made an extended tour 
through the West, where he was received as be- 
fore with the greatest admiration and enthusiasm. 

The distracted condition of the still inchoate 
Whig party in 1836, and the extraordinary popu- 
larity of Jackson, resulted in the complete victory 
of Mr. Van Buren. But the general's chosen 
successor and political heir found the great office to 
which he had been called, and whicli he so eagerly 
desired, anything but a bed of roses. The ruin 
which Jackson's wild policy had prepared was 
close at hand, and three months after the inaugu- 
ration the storm burst with full fury. The banks 
suspended specie payments and universal bank- 
ruptcy reigned throughout the country. Our busi- 
ness interests were in the violent throes of the 
worst financial panic which had ever been known 



230 DANIEL WEBSTER 

in the United States. The history of Mr. Van 
Buren's administration, in its main features, is 
that of a vain struggle with a hopeless network of 
difficulties, and with the misfortune and prostra- 
tion which grew out of this widespread disaster. 
It is not necessary here to enter into the details of 
these events. Mr. Webster devoted himself in 
the Senate to making every effort to mitigate the 
evils which he had prophesied, and to prevent 
their aggravation by further injudicious legisla- 
tion. His most important speech was delivered 
at the special session against the first sub-trea- 
sury bill and Mr. Calhoun's amendment. Mr. 
Calhoun, who had wept over the defeat of the 
bank bill in 1815, was now convinced that all 
banks were mistakes, and wished to prevent the 
acceptance of the notes of specie-paying banks 
for government dues. Mr. Webster's speech was 
the fullest and most elaborate he ever made on the 
subject of the currency and the relations of the 
government to it. His theme was the duty and 
right of the general government under the Consti- 
tution to regulate and control the currency, and 
his masterly argument was the best that has ever 
been made, leaving in fact nothing to be desired. 

In the spring of 1839 there was talk of sending 
Mr. Webster to London as commissioner to settle 
the boundary disputes, but it came to nothing, 
and in the following summer he went to England 
in his private capacity accompanied by his family. 
The visit was in every way successful. It brought 



THE STRUGGLE WITH JACKSON 231 

rest and change as well as pleasure, and was full 
of interest. Mr. Webster was very well received, 
much attention was paid him, and much admira- 
tion shown for him. He commanded all this, not 
only by his appearance, his reputation, and his 
intellectual force, but still more by the fact that 
he was thoroughly and genuinely American in 
thought, feeling, and manner. 

He reached New York on his return at the end 
of December, and was there met by the news of 
General Harrison's nomination by the Whigs. In 
the previous year it had seemed as if, with Clay 
out of the way by the defeat of 1832, and Harri- 
son by that of 1836, the great prize must fall to 
Mr. Webster. His name was brought forward 
by the Whigs of Massachusetts, but it met with 
no response even in New England. It was the 
old story; Mr. Clay and his friends were cool, 
and the masses of the party did not desire Mr. 
Webster. The convention turned from the Mas- 
sachusetts statesman and again nominated the old 
Western soldier. 

Mr. Webster did not hesitate as to the course 
he should pursue upon his return. He had been 
reelected to the Senate m January, 1839, and after 
the session closed in July, 1840, he threw himself 
into the campaign in support of Harrison. The 
people did not desire Mr. Webster to be their 
president, but there was no one whom they so 
much wished to hear. He was besieged from all 
parts of the country with invitations to speak, and 



232 DANIEL WEBSTER 

he answered generously to the call thus made 
upon him. 

On his way home from Washington, in March, 
1837, more than three years before, he had made 
a speech at Niblo's Garden in New York, — the 
greatest purely political speech which he ever de- 
livered. He then reviewed and arraigned with the 
greatest severity the history of Jackson's admin- 
istration, abstaining in his characteristic way from 
all personal attack, but showing, as no one else 
could show, what had been done, and the results 
of .the policy, which were developing as he had 
predicted. He also said that the worst was yet to 
come. The speech produced a profound impres- 
sion. People were still reading it when the worst 
really came, and the great panic broke over the 
country. Mr. Webster had, in fact, struck the 
keynote of the coming campaign in the Niblo- 
Garden speech of 1837. In the summer of 1840 
he spoke in Massachusetts, New York, Pennsyl- 
vania, and Virginia, and was almost continually 
upon the platform. The great feat of 1833-34, 
when he made sixty-four speeches in the Senate 
on the bank question, was now repeated under 
much more difficult conditions. In the first in- 
stance he was addressing a small and select body 
of trained listeners, all more or less familiar with 
the subject. In 1840 he was obliged to present 
these same topics, with all their infinite detail and 
inherent dryness, to vast popular audiences, but 
nevertheless he achieved a marvelous success. The 



THE STRUGGLE WITH JACKSON 233 

chief points which he brought out were the condi- 
tion of the currency, the need of government regu- 
lation, the responsibility of the Democrats, the 
miserable condition of the country, and the exact 
fulfillment of the prophecies he had made. The 
argument and the conclusion were alike irresisti- 
ble, but Mr. Webster showed, in handling his 
subject, not only the variety, richness, and force 
which he had displayed in the Senate, but the 
capacity of presenting it in a way thoroughly 
adapted to the popular mind, and yet, at the same 
time, of preserving the impressive tone of a digni- 
fied statesman, without any degeneration into mere 
stump oratory. This wonderful series of speeches 
produced the greatest possible effect. They were 
heard by thousands and read by tens of thousands. 
They fell, of course, upon willing ears. The peo- 
ple, smarting under bankruptcy, poverty, and 
business depression, were wild for a change; but 
nothing did so much to swell the volume of public 
resentment against the policy of the ruling party 
as these speeches of Mr. Webster, which gave 
character and form to the whole movement. Jack- 
son had sown the wind, and his unlucky successor 
was engaged in the agreeable task of reaping the 
proverbial crop. There was a political revolution. 
The Whigs swept the country by an immense ma- 
jority, the great Democratic party was crushed to 
the earth, and the ignorant misgovern ment of An- 
drew Jackson found at last its fit reward. General 
Harrison, as soon as he was elected, turned to the 



234 DANIEL WEBSTER 

two great chiefs of liis party to invite them to be- 
come the pillars of his administration. Mr. Clay 
declined any cabinet office, but Mr. Webster, after 
some hesitation, accepted the secretaryship of state. 
He resigned his seat in the Senate February 22, 
1841, and on March 4 following took his place in 
the cabinet, and entered upon a new field of public 
service. 



CHAPTER VIII 

SECRETARY OF STATE. — THE ASHBURTON 

TREATY 

There is one feature in the history, or rather 
in the historic scenery of this period, which we 
are apt to overlook. The political questions, the 
debates, the eloquence of that day, give us no idea 
of the city in which the history was made, or of 
the life led by the men who figured in that history. 
Their speeches might have been delivered in any 
great centre of civilization, and in the midst of a 
brilliant and luxurious society. But the Washing- 
ton of 1841, when Mr. Webster took the post which, 
so far as the administration is concerned, is offi- 
cially the first in the society of the capital and of 
the country, was a very odd sort of place, and 
widely different from what it is to-day. It was 
not a village, neither was it a city. It had not 
grown, but had been created for a special purpose. 
A site had been arbitrarily selected, and a city laid 
out on the most magnificent scale. But there was 
no independent life, for the city was wholly official 
in its purposes and its existence. There were a 
few great public buildings, a few krge private 
houses, a few hotels and boarding houses, and a 



23G DANIEL WEBSTER 

large number of negro shanties. The general ef- 
fect was of attempted splendor, which had resulted 
in slovenliness and straggling confusion. The 
streets were unpaved, dusty in summer, and deep 
with mud in winter, so that the mere difficulty of 
getting from place to place was a serious obstacle 
to general society. Cattle fed in the streets, and 
were milked by their owners on the sidewalk. 
There was a grotesque contrast between the stately 
capitol where momentous questions were eloquently 
discussed and such queerly primitive and rude 
surroundings. Few persons were able to entertain 
because few persons had suitable houses. Mem- 
bers of Congress usually clubbed together and took 
possession of a house, and these "messes," as they 
were called, — although without doubt very agree- 
able to their members, — did not offer a mode of 
life which was easily compatible with the demands 
of general society. Social enjoyments, therefore, 
were pursued under difficulties; and the city, al- 
though improving, was dreary enough. 

Society, too, was in a bad condition. The old 
forms and ceremonies of the men of 1789 and the 
manners and breeding of our earliest generation of 
statesmen had passed away, and the new democracy 
had not as yet a system of its own. It was a 
period of transition. The old customs had gone, 
the new ones had not crystallized. The civiliza- 
tion was crude and raw, and in Washington had no 
background whatever, — such as was to be found 
in the old cities and towns of the original thirteen 



SECRETARY OF STATE 237 

States. The tone of the men in public life had 
deteriorated and was growing worse, approaching 
rapidly its lowest point, which it reached during 
the Polk administration. This was due partly to 
the Jackson ian democracy, which had rejected 
training and education as necessary to statesman- 
ship, and had loudly proclaimed the great truths 
of rotation in office, and the spoils to the victors, 
and partly to the slavery agitation which was then 
beginning to make itself felt. The rise of the 
irrepressible conflict between freedom and slavery 
made the South overbearing and truculent; it 
produced that class of politicians known as "North- 
ern men with Southern principles," or, in the 
slang of the day, as "dough-faces;" and it had 
not yet built up a strong, vigorous, and aggressive 
party in the North. The lack of proper social 
opportunities, and this deterioration among men 
in public life, led to an increasing violence and 
roughness in debate, and to a good deal of coarse 
dissipation in private. There was undoubtedly a 
brighter side, but it was limited, and the surround- 
ings of the distinguished men who led our political 
parties in 1841 at the national capital, do not 
present a very cheerful or attractive picture. 

When the new President appeared upon the 
scene he was followed by a general rush of hungry 
office-seekers, who had been starving for ]daces 
for many years. General Harrison was a brave, 
honest soldier and pioneer, simple in henrt and 
manners, unspoiled and untaught by politics, of 



238 DANIEL WEBSTER 

which he had had a good share. He was not a 
great man, but lie was honorable and well inten- 
tioned. He wished to have about him the best 
and ablest men of his party, and to trust to their 
sniidance for a successful administration. But al- 
though he had no desire to invent a policy, or to 
draft state papers, he was determined to be the 
author of his own inaugural speech, and he came 
to Washington with a carefully prepared manu- 
script in his pocket. When Mr. Webster read 
this document he found it full of gratitude to the 
people, and abounding in allusions to Roman his- 
tory. With his strong sense of humor, and of the 
unities and proprieties as well, he was a good deal 
alarmed at the proposed speech; and after much 
labor, and the expenditure of a good deal of tact, 
he succeeded in effecting some important changes 
and additions. When he came home in the even- 
ing, Mrs. Seaton, at whose house he was staying, 
remarked that he looked worried and fatigued, 
and asked if anything had happened. Mr. Web- 
ster replied, "You would think that something 
had happened if you knew what I have done. I 
have killed seventeen Roman proconsuls." It was 
a terrible slaughter for poor Harrison, for the 
proconsuls were probably very dear to his heart. 
His youth had been passed in the time when the 
pseudo classicism of the French Republic and 
Empire was rampant, and now that, in his old age, 
he had been raised to the presidency, his head was 
probably full of the republics of antiquity, and of 



SECRETARY OF STATE 239 

Cinciimatus called from the plough to take the 
helm of state. 

M. de Bacourt, the French minister at this 
period, a rather shallow and illiberal man who 
disliked Mr. Webster, gives, in his recently pub- 
lished correspondence, the following amusing ac- 
count of the presentation of the diplomatic corps 
to President Harrison, — a little bit of contempo- 
rary gossip which carries us back to those days 
better than anything else could possibly do. The 
diplomatic corps assembled at the house of Mr. 
Fox, the British minister, who was to read a 
speech in behalf of the whole body, and thence 
proceeded to the White House where 

" the new secretary of state, Mr. Webster, who is 
much embarrassed by his new functions, came to make 
his arrangements with Mr. Fox. This done, we were 
ranged along the wall in order of seniority, and after too 
long a delay for a country where the chief magistrate 
has no right to keep people waiting, the old general came 
in, followed by all the members of his cabinet, who 
walked in single file, and so kept behind him. He then 
advanced toward Mr. Fox, whom Mr. Webster presented 
to him. Mr. Fox read to him his address. Then the 
President took out his spectacles and read his reply. 
Then, after having shaken hands with the English 
minister, he walked from one end of our line to the 
other, Mr. Webster presenting each of us by name, and 
he shaking hands with each one without saying a word. 
This ceremony finished he returned to the room wlience 
he had come, and reappeared with Mrs. Harrison — the 
widow of his eldest son — upon his arm, whom he pre- 



240 DANIEL WEBSTER 

sented to the diplomatic corps en masse. Mr. Webster, 
who followed, then presented to us Mrs. Fuiley, the 
mother of this Mrs. Harrison, in the following terms : 
' Gentlemen, I introduce to you Mrs. Finley, the lady 
who attends Mrs. Harrison ; ' and observe that this good 
lady who attends the others — takes care of them — is 
blind. Then all at once, a crowd of people rushed into 
the room. They were the wives, sisters, daughters, 
cousins, and lady friends of the President and of all his 
ministers, who were presented to us, and vice versa^ in 
the midst of an inconceivable confusion." 

Fond, however, as Mr. Webster was of society, 
and punctilious as lie was in matters of etiquette 
and propriety, M. de Bacourt to the contrary not- 
withstanding, he had far more important duties to 
perform than those of playing host and receiving 
foreign ministers. Our relations with England 
when he entered the cabinet were such as to make 
war seem almost inevitable. The northeastern 
boundary, undetermined by the treaty of 1783, 
had been the subject of continual and fruitless 
negotiation ever since that time, and was still 
unsettled and more complicated than ever. It 
was agreed that there should be a new survey and 
a new arbitration, but no agreement could be 
reached as to who should arbitrate or what ques- 
tions should be submitted to the arbitrators, and 
the temporary arrangements for the possession of 
the territory in dispute were unsatisfactory and 
precarious. Much more exciting and perilous than 
this old difficulty was a new one and its conse- 



SECRETARY OF STATE 241 

quences growing out of the Canadian reliellion in 
1837. Certain of the rebels fled to the United 
States, and there, in conjunction with American 
citizens, prepared to make incursions into Canada. 
For this i)urpose they fitted out an American 
steamboat, the Caroline. An expedition from 
Canada crossed the Niagara Kiver to the Ameri- 
can shore, set fire to the Caroline, and let her 
drift over the Falls. In the fray which occurred, 
an American named Durfree was killed. The 
British government avow^ed this invasion to be a 
public act and a necessary measure of self-defense ; 
but it was a question when Mr. Van Buren went 
out of office whether this avowal had been made in 
an authentic manner. There was another inci- 
dent, however, also growing out of this affair, even 
more irritating and threatening than the invasion 
itself. In November, 1840, one Alexander Mc- 
Leod came from Canada to New York, where he 
boasted that he was the slayer of Durfree, and 
thereupon was at once arrested on a charge of 
murder and thrown into prison. This aroused 
great anger in England, and the conviction of 
McLeod was all that was needed to cause immedi- 
ate war. In addition to these complications was 
the question of the right of search for the impress- 
ment of British seamen and for the suppression of 
the slave trade. Our government was, of course, 
greatly hampered in action by the rights of Maine 
and Massachusetts on the northeastern boundary, 
and by the fact that McLeod was within the juris- 



242 DANIEL WEBSTER 

diction and in the power of the New York conrts, 
and wholly out of reach of those of the United 
States. The character of the national representa- 
tives on both sides in London tended, moreover, 
to aggravate the growing irritation between the 
two countries. Lord Palmer ston was sharp and 
domineering, and Mr. Stevenson, our minister, 
was by no means mild or conciliatory. Between 
them they did what they could to render accommo- 
dation impossible. 

To evolve a satisfactory and permanent peace 
from these conditions was the task which con- 
fronted Mr. Webster, and he was hardly in office 
before he received a demand from Mr. Fox for 
the release of McLeod, in which full avowal was 
made that the burning of the Caroline was a public 
act. Mr. Webster determined that the proper 
method of settling the boundary question, when 
that subject should be reached, was to agree upon 
a conventional and arbitrary line, and that in the 
mean time the only way to dispose of McLeod was 
to get him out of prison, separate him, diplomat- 
ically speaking, from the affair of the Caroline, 
and then take that up as a distinct matter for ne- 
gotiation with the British government. The diffi- 
culty in regard to McLeod was the most pressing, 
and so to that he gave his immediate attention. 
His first step was to instruct the attorney -general 
to proceed to Lockport, where McLeod was im- 
prisoned, and communicate with the counsel for 
the defense, furnishing them with authentic infer- 



SECRETARY OF STATE 243 

mation that the destruction of the Caroline was a 
public act, and that therefore McLeod could not 
be held responsible. lie then replied to the Brit- 
ish minister that McLeod could, of course, be 
released only by judicial process, but he also in- 
formed Mr. Fox of the steps which had been taken 
by the administration to assure the prisoner a 
complete defense based on the avowal of the Brit- 
ish government that the attack on the Caroline 
was a public act. This threw the responsibility 
for McLeod, and for consequent peace or war, 
where it belonged, on the New York authorities, 
who seemed, however, but little inclined to assist 
the general government. McLeod came before 
the Supreme Court of New York in July, on a 
writ of habeas corpus, but they refused to release 
him on the grounds set forth in Mr. Webster's 
instructions to the attorney-general, and he was 
remanded for trial in October, which was highly 
embarrassing to our government, as it kept this 
dangerous affair open. 

But this and all other embarrassments to the 
secretary of state sank into insignificance beside 
those caused him by the troubles in his own politi- 
cal party. Between the time of the instructions 
to the attorney -general and that of the letter to 
Mr. Fox, President Harrison died, after only a 
month of office. Mr. Tyler, of whose views but 
little was known, at once succeeded, and made no 
change in the cabinet of his predecessor. On the 
last day of May, Congress, called in extra session 



244 DANIEL WEBSTER 

by President Harrison, convened. A bill estab- 
lishing a bank was passed, and Mr. Tyler vetoed 
it on account of constitutional objections to some 
of its features. The triumphant Whigs were filled 
with wrath at this unlooked-for check. ^Ir. Clay 
reflected on the President with great severity in 
the Senate, the members of the party in the House 
were very violent in their expressions of disap- 
proval, and another measure, known as the " Fiscal 
Corporation Act," was at once prepared. Mr. 
Webster regarded this state of affairs with great 
anxiety and alarm. He said that such a contest, 
if persisted in, would ruin the party and deprive 
them of the fruits of their victory, besides imper- 
iling the important foreign policy then just initi- 
ated. He strove to allav the excitement, and re- 
sisted the passage of any new bank measure, much 
as he wished the establishment of such an institu- 
tion, advising postponement and delay for the 
sake of procuring harmony if possible. But the 
party in Congress would not be quieted. They 
were determined to force Mr. Tyler's hand at all 
hazards, and while the new bill was pending, Mr. 
Clay, stung by the taunts of Mr. Buchanan, made 
a savage attack upon the President. As a natural 
consequence, the "Fiscal Corporation " scheme 
shared the fate of its predecessor. The breach 
between the President and his party was opened 
irreparably, and four members of the cabinet at 
once resigned. Mr. Webster was averse to be- 
coming a party to an obvious combination between 



SECRETARY OF STATE 245 

the Senate and the cabinet to harass the President, 
and he was determined not to sacrifice the success 
of his foreign negotiations to a political quarrel. 
He therefore resolved to remain in the cabinet for 
the present, at least, and, after consulting the 
Massachusetts delegation in Congress, who fully 
approved his course, he announced his decision to 
the public in a letter to the "National Intelli- 
gencer." His action soon became the subject of 
much adverse criticism from the Whigs, but at 
this day no one would question that he was entirely 
right. It was not such an easy thing to do, how- 
ever, as it now appears, for the excitement was 
running high among the Whigs, and there was 
great bitterness of feeling toward the President. 
Mr. Webster behaved in an independent and pa- 
triotic manner, showing a liberality of spirit, a 
breadth of view, and a courage of opinion which 
entitle him to the greatest credit. 

Events, which had seemed thus far to go stead- 
ily against him in his negotiations, and which had 
been supplemented by the attacks of the opposi- 
tion in Congress for his alleged interference with 
the course of justice in New York, now began to 
turn in his favor. The news of the refusal of the 
New York court to release McLeod on a habeas 
corpus had hardly reached England when the Mel- 
bourne ministry was beaten in the House of Com- 
mons, and Sir Robert Peel came in, briuiiinii' with 
him Lord Aberdeen as the successor of Lord Pal- 
merston in the department of foreign affairs. The 



246 DANIEL WEBSTER 

new ministry was disposed to be much more peace- 
ful than their predecessors had been, and the ne- 
gotiations at once began to move more smoothly. 
Great care was still necessary to prevent outbreaks 
on the border, but in October McLeod proved an 
alibi and was acquitted, and thus the most dan- 
gerous element in our relations with England was 
removed. Matters were still further improved by 
the retirement of Mr. Stevenson, whose successor 
in London was Mr. Everett, eminently conciliatory 
in disposition and in full sympathy with the secre- 
tary of state. 

Mr. Webster was now able to. turn his undivided 
attention to the long-standing boundary question. 
His proposition to agree upon a conventional line 
had been made known by Mr. Fox to his govern- 
ment, and soon afterwards Mr. Everett was in- 
formed that Lord Ashburton would be sent to 
Washington on a special mission. The selection 
of an envoy well known for his friendly feeling 
toward the United States, which was also tradi- 
tional with the great banking-house of his family, 
was in itself a pledge of conciliation and good -will. 
Lord Ashburton reached Washington in April, 
1842, and the negotiation at once began. 

It is impossible and needless to give here a de- 
tailed account of that negotiation. We can only 
glance briefly at the steps taken by Mr. Webster 
and at the results achieved by him. There were 
many difficulties to be overcome, and in the winter 
of 1841-42 the case of the Creole added a fresh 



SECRETARY OF STATE 247 

and dangerous complication. The Creole was a 
slave ship, on which the negroes had risen, and, 
taking possession, had carried her into an English 
port in the West Indies, where assistance was 
refused to the crew, and where the slaves were 
allowed to go free. This was an act of very 
doubtful legality, it touched both England and 
the Southern States in a very sensitive point, and 
it required all Mr. Webster's tact and judgment 
to keep it out of the negotiation until the main 
issue had been settled. 

The principal obstacle in the arrangement of 
the boundary dispute arose from the interests and 
the attitude of Massachusetts and Maine. Mr. 
Webster obtained with sufficient ease the appoint- 
ment of commissioners from the former State, and, 
through the agency of Mr. Sparks, who was sent 
to Augusta for the purpose, commissioners were 
also appointed in Maine; but these last were in- 
structed to adhere to the line of 1783 as claimed 
by the United States. Lord Ashburton and Mr. 
Webster readily agreed that a treaty must come 
from mutual conciliation and compromise; but, 
after a good deal of correspondence, it became 
apparent that the Maine commissioners and the 
English envoy could not be brought to an agree- 
ment. A deadlock and consequent loss of the 
treaty were imminent. Mr. AVebster then had a 
long interview with Lord Ashburton. By a pro- 
cess of give and take they agreed on a conventional 
line and on the concession of certain rights, which 



248 DANIEL WEBSTER 

made a fair bargain, but unluckily the loss was 
suffered by Maine and Massachusetts, while the 
benefits received by the United States accrued to 
New York, Vermont, and New Hampshire. This 
brought the negotiators to the point at which they 
had already been forced to halt so many times be- 
fore. Mr. Webster now cut the knot by propos- 
ing that the United States should indemnify Maine 
and Massachusetts in money for the loss they were 
to suffer in territory, and by his dexterous man- 
agement the commissioners of the two States were 
persuaded to assent to this arrangement, while 
Lord Ashburton was induced to admit the agree- 
ment into a clause of the treaty. This disposed 
of the chief question in dispute, but two other 
subjects were included in the treaty besides the 
boundary. The first related to the right of search 
claimed by England for the suppression of the 
slave trade. This was met by what was called 
the "cruising convention," a clause which stipu- 
lated that each nation should keep its own squad- 
ron on the coast of Africa, to enforce separately 
its own laws against the slave trade, but in mutual 
cooperation. The other subject of agreement grew 
out of the Creole case. England supposed that 
we sought the return of the negroes because they 
were slaves, but Mr. Webster argued that they 
were demanded as mutineers and murderers. The 
result was an article which, while it carefully 
avoided even the appearance of an attempt to bind 
England to return fugitive slaves, provided amply 



SECRETARY OF STATE 249 

for the extradition of criminals. Tlie case of the 
Caroline was disposed of by a formal admission of 
the inviolability of national territory and by an 
apolog}' for the burning of the steamboat. As to 
the action in regard to the slaves on the Creole, 
]\Ir. Webster could only obtain the assurance that 
there should be "no officious interference with 
American vessels driven by accident or violence 
into British ports," and with this he was content 
to let the matter drop. On the subject of impress- 
ment, the old casus belli of 1812, Mr. Webster 
wrote a forcible letter to Lord Ashburton. In it 
he said that, in future, "in every regularly docu- 
mented American merchant vessel, the crew who 
navigate it will find their protection in the flag 
which is over them." In other words, if you take 
sailors out of our vessels, we shall fight; and this 
simple statement of fact ended the whole matter, 
and was quite as binding on England as any treaty 
could have been. 

Thus the negotiation closed. The only serious 
objection to its results was that the interests of 
Maine were sacrificed perhaps unduly, — as a re- 
cent discussion of that point seems to show. But 
such a sacrifice was fully justified by what was 
achieved. A war was averted, a long-standing 
and menacing dispute was settled, and a treaty 
was concluded which was creditable and honorable 
to all concerned. By his successful introduction 
of the extradition clause, Mr. Webster rendered 
a great service to civilization and to the suppres- 



250 DANIEL WEBSTER 

sion and pmiisliment of crime. Mr. Webster was 
greatly aided throughout — both in his arguments 
and in the construction of the treaty itself — by 
the learned and valuable assistance freely given by 
Judge Story. But he conducted the whole nego- 
tiation with great ability and in the spirit of a 
liberal and enlightened statesman. He displayed 
the highest tact and dexterity in reconciling so 
many clashing interests, and avoiding so many 
perilous side issues, until he had brought the main 
problem to a solution. In all that he did and 
said he showed a dignity and an entire sufficiency, 
which make this negotiation one of the most cred- 
itable — so far as its conduct was concerned — in 
which the United States ever engaged. 

While the negotiation was in progress there 
was a constant murmur among the Whigs about 
Mr. Webster's remaining in the cabinet, and as 
soon as the treaty was actually signed a loud 
clamor began — both among the politicians and in 
the newspapers — for his resignation. In the 
midst of this outcry the Senate met and ratified 
the treaty by a vote of thirty -nine to nine, — a 
great triumph for its author. But the debate dis- 
closed a vigorous opposition, Benton and Buchanan 
both assailing Mr. W^ebster for neglecting and 
sacrificing American, and particularly Southern, 
interests. At the same time the controversy which 
Mr. W^ebster called "the battle of the maps," and 
which was made a great deal of in England, began 
to show itself. A map of 1783, which Mr. Web- 



SECRETARY OF 8TATE 251 

ster oljtained, had been discovered in Paris, sus- 
taining the English view, while another was after- 
wards found in London, supporting the American 
claim. Neither was of the least consequence, as 
the new line was conventional and arbitrary; but 
the discoveries caused a great deal of unreasonable 
excitement. Mr. Webster saw very plainly that 
the treaty was not yet secure. It was exposed to 
attacks both at home and abroad, and had still to 
pass Parliament. Until it was entirely safe, Mr. 
Webster determined to remain at his post. The 
clamor continued about his resignation, and rose 
round him at his home in Marshfield, whither he 
had gone for rest. At the same time the Whig 
convention of Massachusetts declared formally a 
complete separation from the President. In the 
language of to-day, they "read Mr. Tyler out of 
the party." There was a variety of motives for 
this action. One was to force Mr. Webster out 
of the cabinet, another to advance the fortunes of 
Mr. Clay, in favor of whose presidential candidacy 
movements had begun in INIassachusetts, even 
among Mr. Webster's personal friends, as well as 
elsewhere. Mr. Webster had just declined a pub- 
lic dinner, but he now decided to meet his friends 
in Faneuil Hall. An immense audience gathered 
to hear him, many of them strongly disapproving 
his course, but after he had spoken a few moments, 
he had them completely under control, lie re- 
viewed the negotiation; he discussed fully the 
differences in the party; he deplored, and he did 



252 DANIEL WEBSTER 

not hesitate strongly to condemn these quarrels, 
because by them the fruits of victory were lost, 
and Whig policy abandoned. With boldness and 
dignity he denied the right of the convention to 
declare a separation from the President, and the 
implied attempt to coerce himself and others. "I 
am, gentlemen, a little hard to coax," he said, 
"but as to being driven, that is out of the ques- 
tion. If I choose to remain in the President's 
councils, do these gentlemen mean to say that I 
cease to be a Massachusetts Whig? I am quite 
ready to jnit that question to the people of Massa- 
chusetts." He was well aware that he was losing 
party strength by his action ; he knew that behind 
all these resolutions was the intention to raise his 
great rival to the presidency; but he did not shrink 
from avowing his independence and his mtention 
of doing what he believed to be right, and what 
posterity admits to have been so. Mr. Webster 
never appeared to better advantage, and he never 
made a more manly speech than on this occasion, 
when, without any bravado, he quietly set the in- 
fluence and the threats of his party at defiance. 

He was not mistaken in thinking that the treaty 
was not yet in smooth water. It was again at- 
tacked in the Senate, and it had a still more severe 
ordeal to go through in Parliament. The oppo- 
sition, headed by Lord Palmerston, assailed the 
treaty and Lord Ashburton himself, with the great- 
est virulence, denouncing the one as a capitulation, 
and the other as a grossly unfit appointment. 




/l^ U^Ui.^'^i 



>^-^^>J 



SECRETARY OF STATE 253 

Moreover, the lans^iiao^e of the President's messao;e 
led England to believe that we claimed that the 
right of search had been abandoned. After much 
correspondence, tins misunderstanding drew forth 
an able letter from Mr. AYebster, stating that the 
right of search had not been included in the treaty, 
but that the "cruising convention " had rendered 
the question unimportant. Finally, all complica- 
tions were dispersed, and the treaty ratified ; and 
then came an attack from an unexpected quarter. 
General Cass — our minister at Paris — undertook 
to protest against the treaty, denounce it, and 
leave his post on account of it. This wholly gra- 
tuitous assault led to a public correspondence, in 
which General Cass, on his own confession, was 
completely overthrown and broken down by the 
secretary of state. This was the last difficulty, 
and the work was finally accepted and complete. 

During this important and absorbing negotia- 
tion, other matters of less moment, but still of 
considerable consequence, had been met by Mr. 
Webster, and successfully disposed of. He made 
a treaty with Portugal, respecting duties on wines ; 
he carried on a long correspondence with our min- 
ister to Mexico in relation to certain American 
prisoners ; he vindicated the course of the United 
States in regard to the independence of Texas, 
teaching M. de Bocanegra, the Mexican secretary 
of state, a lesson as to the duties of neutrality, 
and administering a severe reproof to that gentle- 
man for imputing bad faith to the United States; 



254 DANIEL WEBSTER 

he conducted the correspondence, and directed the 
policy of the government in regard to the troubles 
in Rhode Island ; he made an effort to settle the 
Oregon boundary; and, finally, he set on foot the 
Chinese mission, which, after being offered to Mr. 
Everett, was accepted by Mr. Gushing with the 
best results. But his real work came to an end 
with the correspondence with General Cass at the 
close of 1842, and in May of the following year 
he resigned the secretaryship. In the two years 
during which he had been at the head of the cabi- 
net he had done much. His work added to his 
fame by the ability which it exhibited in a new 
field, and has stood the test of time. In a period 
of difficulty, and even danger, he proved himself 
singularly weU adapted for the conduct of foreign 
affairs, — a department which is most peculiarly 
and traditionally the employment and test of a 
highly trained statesman. It may be fairly said 
that no one, with the exception of John Quincy 
Adams, has ever shown higher qualities, or at- 
tained greater success in the administration of the 
State Department, than Mr. Webster did while 
in Mr. Tyler's cabinet. 

On his resignation, he returned at once to pri- 
vate life, and passed the next summer on his farm 
at Marshfield, — now grown into a large estate, 
— which was a source of constant interest and 
delight, and where he was able to have beneath 
his ey«e his beloved sea. His private affairs were 
in disorder, and required his immediate attention. 



SECRETARY OF STATE 255 

He threw himself Into his profession, and his prac- 
tice at once became active, hicrative, and absorb- 
ing. To this period of retirement belong the sec- 
ond Bunker Hill oration and the Girard argument, 
which made so nuich noise in its day. He kept 
himself aloof from polities, but could not wholly 
withdraw from them. The feeling against him, 
on account of his continuance in the cabinet, had 
subsided, and there was a feeble and somewhat 
fitful movement to drop Clay, and present Mr. 
Webster as a candidate for the presidency. Mr. 
Webster, however, made a speech at Andover, 
defending his course and advocating Whig princi- 
ples, and declared that he was not a candidate for 
office. He also refused to allow New Hampshire 
to mar party harmony by bringing his name for- 
ward. When Mr. Clay was nominated, in May, 
1844,^ Mr. Webster, who had beheld with anxiety 
the rise of the Liberty party and prophesied the 
annexation of Texas, decided, although he was 
dissatisfied with the silence of the Whigs on this 
subject, to sustain their candidate. This was un- 
doubtedly the wisest course; and, having once 
enlisted, he gave Mr. Clay a hearty and vigorous 
support, making a series of powerful speeches, 
chiefly on the tariff, and second in variety and 
ability only to those which he had delivered in 
the Harrison campaign. Mr. Clay was defeated 
largely by the action of the Liberty ])arty, and 
the silence of the Whigs about Texas and slavery 
cost them the election. At the be^jinning of the 



256 DANIEL WEBSTER 

year Mr. Webster had declined a reelection to the 
Senate, but it was impossible for him to remain 
out of politics, and the pressure to return soon 
became too strong to be resisted. Mr. Choate's 
term expired on March 4, 1845, and Mr. Webster 
was reelected senator from Massachusetts to suc- 
ceed him. On tlie first of March the intrigue, to 
perfect which Mr. Calhoun had accepted the State 
Department, culminated, and the resolutions for 
the annexation of Texas passed both branches of 
Congress. Four days later Mr. Polk's adminis- 
tration, pledged to the support and continuance 
of the annexation policy, was in power, and Mr. 
Webster had taken his seat in the Senate for his 
last term. 



CHAPTER IX 

RETURN TO THE SENATE. — THE SEVENTH OF 

MARCH SPEECH 

The principal events of Mr. Polk's administra- 
tion belong to or grow out of the slavery agitation, 
then beginning to assume most terrible propor- 
tions. So far as Mr. Webster is concerned, they 
form part of the history of his course on the sla- 
very question, which culminated in the famous 
speech of March 7, 1850. Before approaching 
that subject, however, it will be necessary to touch 
very briefly on one or two points of importance in 
Mr. Webster's career, which have no immediate 
bearing on the question of slavery, and no relation 
to the final and decisive stand which Mr. Webster 
took in regard to it. 

The Ashburton treaty was open to one just 
criticism. It did not go far enough. It did not 
settle the northwestern as it did the northeastern 
boundary. Mr. Webster, as has been said, made 
an effort to deal with the former as well as the 
latter, but he met with no encouragement, and as 
he was then preparing to retire from office, the 
matter dropped. In regard to the northwestern 
boundary, Mr. Webster agreed with the opinion 



258 DANIEL WEBSTER 

of ^Nlr. Monroe's cabinet, that the forty-ninth 
parallel was a fair and ])roper line; but the British 
undertook to claim the line of the Columbia River, 
and this excited corresponding claims on our side. 
The Democracy for political purposes became es- 
pecially warlike and patriotic. They declared in 
their platform that we must have the whole of 
Oregon and reoccupy it at once. Mr. Polk em- 
bodied this view in his message, together with the 
assertion that our rights extended to the line of 
54° 40' north, and a shout of "fifty-four-forty or 
fight" went through the land from the enthusiastic 
Democracy. If this attitude meant anything it 
meant war, inasmuch as our proposal for the forty- 
ninth parallel, and the free navigation of the Co- 
lumbia Kiver, made in the autunm of 1845, had 
been rejected by England, and then withdrawn by 
us. Under these circumstances Mr. Webster felt 
it his duty to come forward and exert all his influ- 
ence to maintain peace, and to promote a clear 
comprehension, both in the United States and in 
Europe, of the points at issue. His speech on this 
subject and with this aim was delivered in'Faneuil 
Hall. He spoke of the necessity of peace, of the 
fair adjustment offered by an acceptance of the 
forty-ninth parallel, and derided the idea of cast- 
ing two great nations into war for such a question 
as this. He closed with a forcible and solemn 
denunciation of the president or minister who 
should dare to take the responsibility for kindling 
tlie flames of war on such a pretext. The speech 



KETURN TO THE SENATE 259 

was widely read. It was translated into neaily 
all the languages of Europe, and on the Continent 
had a great effect. About a month later he wrote 
to Mr. MacGregor of Ghisgow, suggesting that 
the British government should offer to accept the 
forty-ninth parallel, and his letter was shown to 
Lord Aberdeen, who at once acted upon the advice 
it contained. While this letter, however, was on 
its way, certain resolutions were introduced in the 
Senate relating to the national defenses, and to 
give notice of the termination of the convention 
for the joint occupation of Oregon, which would 
of course have been nearly equivalent to a decla- 
ration of war. Mr. Webster opposed the resolu- 
tions, and insisted that, while the executive, as he 
believed, had no real wish for war, this talk was 
kept up about "all or none," which left nothing to 
negotiate about. The notice finally passed, but 
before it could be delivered by our minister in 
London, Lord Aberdeen's proposition of the forty- 
ninth parallel, as suggested by Mr. Webster, had 
been received at Washington, where it was ac- 
cepted by the truculent administration, agreed to 
by the Senate, and finally embodied in a treaty. 
Mr. Webster's opposition had served its purpose 
in delaying action and saving bluster from bein*'* 
converted into actual war, — a practical conclusion 
by no means desired by the dominant ]>artv. ^\llo 
had talked so loud that they came very near blun- 
dering into hostilities merely as a matter of self- 
justification. The declarations of the Democratic 



260 DANIEL WEBSTER 

convention and of the Democratic President in 
regard to England were really only sound and 
fury, although they went so far that the final re- 
treat was noticeable and not very graceful. The 
Democratic leaders had had no intention of fight- 
ing with England when all they could hoi)e to gain 
would be glory and hard knocks, but they had a 
very definite idea of attacking without bluster and 
in good earnest another nation where there was 
territory to be obtained for slavery. 

The Oregon question led, however, to an attack 
upon Mr. Webster which cannot be wholly passed 
over. He had, of course, his personal enemies in 
both parties, and his effective opposition to war 
with England greatly angered some of the most 
warlike of the Democrats, and especially Mr. C. 
J. Ingersoll of Pennsylvania, a bitter Anglopho- 
bist. Mr. Ingersoll, in February, made a savage 
attack upon the Ashburton negotiation, the treaty 
of Washington, and upon Mr. Webster person- 
ally, alleging that as secretary of state he had been 
guilty of a variety of grave misdemeanors, includ- 
ing a corrupt use of the public money. Some of 
these charges, those relating to the payment of 
McLeod's counsel by our government, to instruc- 
tions to the attorney-general to take charge of 
McLeod's defense, and to a threat by Mr. Web- 
ster tliat if McLeod were not released New York 
would be laid in ashes, were repeated in the Senate 
by Mr. Dickinson of New York. Mr. Webster 
peremptorily called for all the papers relating to 



RETURN TO THE SENATE 261 

the negotiation of 1842, and on the sixth and 
seventh of April (1846), he made the elaborate 
speech in defense of the Ashburton treaty, which 
is included in his collected works. It is one of 
the strongest and most virile speeches he ever de- 
livered. He was profoundly indignant, and he 
had the completest mastery of his subject. In 
fact, he was so deeply angered by the charges 
made against him, that he departed from his al- 
most invariable practice, and indulged in a severe 
personal denunciation of Ingersoll and Dickinson. 
Although he did not employ personal invective in 
his oratory, it was a weapon which he was capable 
of using with most terrible effect, and his blows 
fell with crushing force upon Ingersoll, who writhed 
under the strokes. Through some inferior officers 
of the State Department Ingersoll got what he 
considered proofs, and then introduced resolutions 
caUing for an account of all payments from the 
secret service fund ; for communications made by 
Mr. Webster to Messrs. Adams and Gushing of 
the Committee on Foreign Affairs; for all papers 
relating to McLeod, and for the minutes of the 
Committee on Foreign Affairs, to show that Mr. 
Webster had expressed an opinion adverse to our 
claim in the Oregon dispute. Mr. Ingersoll closed 
his speech by a threat of impeaclmient as the 
result and reward of all this evil-doing, and an 
angry debate followed, in which Mr. Webster was 
attacked and defended with equal violence. Pre- 
sident Polk replied to the call of the House by 



262 DANIEL WEBSTER 

saying that he couhl not feel justified, either mor- 
ally or legally, in revealing the uses of the secret 
service fund. INIeautime a similar resolution was 
defeated in the Senate by a vote of forty -four to 
one, Mr. Webster remarking that he was glad 
that the President had refused the request of the 
House; that he should have been sorry to have 
seen an important principle violated, and that he 
was not in the least concerned at being thus left 
without an explanation ; he needed no defense, he 
said, against such attacks. 

Mr. Ingersoll, rebuffed by the President, then 
made a personal explanation, alleging specifically 
that Mr. Webster had made an unlawful use of 
tlie secret service money, that he had employed it 
to corrupt the press, and that he was a defaulter. 
Mr. Ashmun of Massachusetts replied with great 
bitterness, and the charges were referred to a com- 
mittee. It appeared, on investigation, that Mr. 
Webster had been extremely careless in his ac- 
counts, and had delayed in making them up and 
in rendering vouchers, faults to which he was 
naturally prone; but it also appeared that the 
money had been properly spent, that the accounts 
had ultimately been made up, and that there was 
no evidence of improper use. The committee's 
report was laid upon the table, the charges came 
to nothing, and Mr. Ingersoll was left in a very 
unpleasant position with regard to the manner in 
which he had obtained his information from the 
State Department. The affair is of interest now 



RETURN TO THE SENATE 2G3 

merely as showing how deeply rooted was ]\Ir. 
Webster's habitual carelessness in money matters, 
even when it was liable to expose him to very grave 
imputations, and what a very dangerous man he 
was to arouse and put on the defensive. 

Mr. Webster was absent when the intrigue and 
scheming of Mr. Polk culminated in war with 
Mexico, and so his vote was not given either for 
or against it. He opposed the volunteer system 
as a mongrel contrivance, and resisted it as he had 
the conscription bill in the war of 1812, as un- 
constitutional. He also opposed the continued 
prosecution of the war, and, when it drew toward 
a close, was most earnest against the acquisition of 
new territory. In the summer of 1847 he made 
an extended tour through the Southern States, and 
was received there, as he had been in the West, 
with every expression of interest and admiration. 

The Mexican war, however, cost Mr. Webster 
far more than the anxiety and disappointment 
which it brought to him as a public man. His 
second son. Major Edward Webster, died near 
the city of Mexico, from disease contracted by 
exposure on the march. This melancholy news 
reached Mr. Webster when important matters 
which demanded his attention were pending in 
Congress. Measures to continue the war were 
before the Senate even after they had ratified tlie 
peace. Tliese measures Mr. Webster strongly re- 
sisted, and he also opposed, in a speech of great 
power, the acquisition of new territories by con- 



264 DANIEL WEBSTER 

quest, as threatening the very existence of the 
nation, the principles of the Constitution, and the 
Constitution itself. The increase of senators, which 
was, of course, the object of the South in annexing 
Texas and in the proposed additions from Mexico, 
he regarded as destroying the balance of the gov- 
ernment, and therefore he denounced the plan of 
acquisition by conquest in the strongest terms. 
The course about to be adopted, he said, will turn 
the Constitution into a deformity, into a curse 
rather than a blessing; it will make a frame of 
government founded on the grossest inequality, 
and will imperil the existence of the Union. With 
this solemn warning he closed his speech, and im- 
mediately left Washington for Boston, where his 
daughter, Mrs. Appleton, was sinking in consump- 
tion. She died on April 28 and was buried on 
May 1. Three days later, Mr. Webster followed 
to the grave the body of his son Edward, which 
had been brought from Mexico. Two such terri- 
ble blows, coming so near together, need no com- 
ment. They tell their own sad story. One child 
only remained to him of all who had gathered 
about his knees in the happy days at Portsmouth 
and Boston, and his mind turned to thoughts of 
death as he prepared at Marshfield a final resting- 
place for himself and those he had loved. What- 
ever successes or defeats were still in store for him, 
the heavy cloud of domestic sorrow could never be 
dispersed in the years that remained, nor could the 
gaps which had been made be filled or forgotten. 



RETURN TO THE SENATE 2G5 

But the sting of j^ersonal disappointment and of 
frustrated ambition, trivial enough in comparison 
with such griefs as these, was now added to this 
heavy burden of domestic affliction. Tlie success 
of General Taylor in Mexico rendered him a most 
tempting candidate for the Whigs to nominate. 
His military services and his personal popularity 
promised victory, and the fact that no one knew 
Taylor's political principles, or even whether he was 
a Whig or a Democrat, seemed rather to increase 
than diminish his attractions in the eyes of the 
politicians. A movement was set on foot to bring 
about this nomination, and its managers planned 
to make Mr. Webster vice-president on the ticket 
with the victorious soldier. Such an offer was a 
melancholy commentary on his ambitious hopes. 
He spurned the proposition as a personal indig- 
nity, and, disapproving always of the selection of 
military men for the presidency, openly refused 
to give his assent to Taylor's nomination. Other 
trials, however, were still in store for him. Mr. 
Clay was a candidate for the nomination, and 
many Whigs, feeling that his success meant an- 
other party defeat, turned to Taylor as the only 
instrument to prevent this danger. In February, 
1848, a call was issued in New York for a public 
meeting to advance General Taylor's candidacy, 
which was signed by many of ]\Ir. Webster's jier- 
sonal and political friends. Mr. AVebster was 
surprised and grieved, and bitterly resented this 
action. His biographer, Mr. Curtis, speaks of it 



266 DANIEL WEBSTER 

as a blunder which rendered Mr. Webster's nomi- 
nation hopeless. The truth is, that it was a most 
significant illustration of the utter futility of Mr. 
Webster's presidential aspirations. These friends 
in New York, who no doubt honestly desired his 
nomination, were so well satisfied that it was per- 
fectly impracticable, that they turned to General 
Taylor to avoid the disaster threatened, as they 
believed, by Mr. Clay's success. Mr. Webster 
predicted truly that Clay and Taylor would be the 
leading candidates before the convention, but he 
was wholly mistaken in supposing that the move- 
ment in New York would bring about the nomina- 
tion of the former. His friends had judged rightly. 
Taylor was the only man who could defeat Clay, 
and he was nominated on the fourth ballot. Mas- 
sachusetts voted steadily for Webster, but he never 
approached a nomination. Even Scott had twice 
as many votes. The result of the convention led 
Mr. Webster to take a very gloomy view of the 
prospects of the Whigs, and he was strongly in- 
clined to retire to his tent and let them go to 
deserved ruin. In private conversation he spoke 
most disparagingly of the nomination, the Whig 
party, and the Whig candidate. His strictures 
were well deserved, but, as the election drew on, he 
found or believed it to be impossible to live up to 
them. He was not ready to go over to the Free- 
Soil party, he could not remain silent, yet he 
could not give Taylor a full support. In Septem- 
ber, 1848, he made his famous speech at Marsh- 



RETURN TO THE SENATE 267 

field, in which, after declaring that the "sagacious, 
wise, far-seeing doctrine of availability lay at the 
root of the whole matter," and that "the nomina- 
tion was one not fit to be made," he said that 
General Taylor was personally a brave and honor- 
able man, and that, as the choice lay between him 
and the Democratic candidate. General Cass, he 
should vote for the former and advised his friends 
to do the same. He afterwards made another 
speech, in a similar but milder strain, in Faneuil 
Hall. Mr. Webster's attitude was not unlike 
that of Hamilton when he published his celebrated 
attack on Adams, which ended by advising all 
men to vote for that objectionable man. The con- 
clusion was a little impotent in both instances, but 
in Mr. Webster's case the results were better. 
The politicians and lovers of availability had judged 
wisely, and Taylor was triumphantly elected. 

Before the new President was inaugurated, in 
the winter of 1848-49, the struggle began in Con- 
gress which led to the delivery of the 7th of March 
speech by Mr. Webster in the following year. At 
this point, therefore, it becomes necessary to turn 
back and review briefly and rapidly jMr. Web- 
ster's course in regard to the question of slavery. 

His first important utterance on this momentous 
question was in 1819, when the land was distracted 
with the conflict which had suddenly arisen over 
the admission of Missouri. Massachusetts wus 
strongly in favor of the exclusion of slavery from 
the new States, and utterly averse to any comjjro- 



2G8 DANIEL WEBSTER 

mise. A meeting was held in the state-house at 
Boston, and a committee was appointed to draft a 
memorial to Congress, on the subject of the prohi- 
bition of slavery in the territories. This memo- 
rial, — which was afterwards adopted, — was drawn 
by Mr. Webster, as chairman of the committee. 
It set forth, first, the belief of its signers that 
Congress had the constitutional power "to make 
such a prohibition a condition on the admission of 
a new State into the Union, and that it is just 
and proper that they should exercise that power." 
Then came an argument on the constitutional 
question, and then the reasons for the exercise of 
the power as a general policy. The first point was 
that it would prevent further inequality of repre- 
sentation, such as existed under the Constitution 
in the old States, but which could not be increased 
without danger. The next argument went straight 
to the merits of the question, as involved in slavery 
as a system. After pointing out the value of the 
ordinance of 1787 to the Northwest, the memorial 
continued : — 

"We appeal to the justice and the wisdom of the 
national councils to prevent the further progress of a 
great and serious evil. We appeal to those who look 
forward to the remote consequences of their measures, 
and who cannot balance a temporary or trifling con- 
venience, if there were such, against a permanent grow- 
ing and desolating evil. 

"... The Missouri territory is a new country. If its 
extensive and fertile fields shall be opened as a market 



RETURN TO THE SENATE 269 

for slaves, the government will seem to become a party 
to a traffic, which in so many acts, through so many 
years, it has denounced as impolitic, unchristian, and 
inhuman. . . . The laws of the United States have de- 
nounced heavy penalties against the traffic in slaves, 
because such traffic is deemed unjust and inhuman. 
We appeal to the spirit of these laws; we appeal to 
this justice and humanity ; we ask whether they ought 
not to operate, on the present occasion, with all their 
force? We have a strong feeling of the injustice of 
any toleration of slavery. Circumstances have entailed 
it on a portion of our community, which cannot be im- 
mediately relieved from it without consequences more 
injurious than the suffering of the evil. But to permit 
it in a new country, where yet no habits are formed 
which render it indispensable, what is it but to en- 
courage that rapacity and fraud and violence against 
which we have so long pointed the denunciation of 
our penal code ? What is it but to tarnish the proud 
fame of the country ? What is it but to render ques- 
tionable all its professions of regard for the rights of 
humanity and the liberties of mankind." 

A year later Mr. Webster again spoke on one 
portion of this subject, and in the same tone of 
deep hostility and reproach. This second instance 
was that famous and much quoted passage of his 
Plymouth oration in which he denounced the Afri- 
can slave trade. Every one remembers the ringing 
words : — 

" I hear the sound of the hammer, I see the smoke of 
the furnaces where manacles and fetters are still forged 
for human limbs. I see the visages of those who, by 



270 DANIEL WEBSTER 

stealth and at midnight, labor in this work of hell, — 
foul and dark as may become the artificers of such in- 
struments of misery and torture. Let that spot be puri- 
fied, or let it cease to be of New England. Let it be 
purified, or let it be set aside from the Christian world ; 
let it be put out of the circle of human sympathies and 
human regards, and let civilized man henceforth have 
no communion with it." 

This is directed against the African slave trade, 
the most hideous feature, perhaps, in the system. 
But there was no real distinction between slavers 
plying from one American port to another and 
those which crossed the ocean for the same pur- 
pose. There was no essential difference between 
slaves raised for the market in Virginia — whence 
they were exported and sold — and those kidnapped 
for the same object on the Guinea coast. The 
physical suffering of a land journey might be less 
than that of a long sea-voyage, but the anguish of 
separation between mother and child was the same 
in all cases. The chains wMch clanked on the 
limbs of tke wretched creatures, driven from the 
auction block along the road which passed beneath 
the national capitol, and the fetters of the captured 
fugitive were no softer or lighter than those forged 
for the cargo of the slave ships. Yet the man 
who so magnificently denounced the one in 1820, 
found no cause to repeat the denunciation in 1850, 
when only domestic traffic was in question. The 
memorial of 1819 and the oration of 1820 place 
the ilfrican slave trade and the domestic branch 



RETURN TO THE SENATE 271 

of the business on precisely the same ground of 
infamy and cruelty. In 1850 Mr. Webster seems 
to have discovered that there was a wide gulf fixed 
between them, for the latter wholly failed to excite 
the stern condemnation poured forth by the memo- 
rialist of 1819 and the orator of 1820. The Fuo-i- 
tive Slave Law, more inhuman than either of the 
forms of traffic, was defended in 1850 on good 
constitutional grounds; but the eloquent invective 
of the early days against an evil which constitu- 
tions might necessitate but could not alter or jus- 
tify, does not go hand in hand with the legal 
argument. 

The next occasion after the Missouri Compro- 
mise, on which slavery made its influence strongly 
felt at Washington, was when Mr. Adams's scheme 
of the Panama mission aroused such bitter and 
unexpected resistance in Congress. Mr. Webster 
defended the policy of the President with great 
ability, but he confined himseK to the international 
and constitutional questions which it involved, and 
did not discuss the underlying motive and true 
source of the opposition. The debate on Foote's 
resolution in 1830, in the wide range which it 
took, of course included slavery, and JMr. Hayne 
had a good deal to say on that subject, which lay 
at the bottom of the tariff agitation, as it did at 
that of every Southern movement of any real im- 
portance. In his reply, Mr. Webster said tliat 
he had made no attack upon this sensitive institu- 
tion, that he had simply stated tliat the Northwest 



272 DANIEL WEBSTER 

had been greatly benefited by the exclusion of 
slavery, and that it would have been better for 
Kentucky if she had come within the scope of the 
ordinance of 1787. The weight of his remarks 
was directed to showing that the complaint of 
Northern attacks on slavery as existing in the 
Southern States, or of Northern schemes to compel 
the abolition of slavery, was utterly groundless 
and fallacious. At the same time he pointed out 
the way in which slavery was continually used to 
unite the South against the North. 

" This feeling," he said, " always carefully kept alive, 
and maintained at too intense a heat to admit discrim- 
ination or reflection, is a lever of great power in our 
political machine. There is not and never has been a 
disposition in the North to interfere with these interests 
of the South. Such interference has never been sup- 
posed to be within the power of government ; nor has it 
been in any way attempted. The slavery of the South 
has always been regarded as a matter of domestic policy 
left with the States themselves, and with which the Fed- 
eral government had nothing to do. Certainly, sir, I 
am and ever have been of that opinion. The gentle- 
man, indeed, argues that slavery, in the abstract, is no 
evil. Most assuredly, I need not say I differ with him 
altogether and most widely on that point. I regard do- 
mestic slavery as one of the greatest evils, both moral 
and political." 

His position is here clearly defined. He admits 
fully that slavery within the States cannot be in- 
terfered with by the general government, under 



RETURN TO THE SENATE 273 

the Constitution. But he also insists that it is a 
great evil, and the obvious conclusion is that its 
extension, over which the government does have 
control, must and should be checked. This is the 
attitude of the memorial and the oration. Nothing 
has yet changed. There is less fervor in the de- 
nunciation of slavery, but that may be fairly attrib- 
uted to circumstances which made the maintenance 
of the general government and the enforcement of 
the revenue laws the main points in issue. 

In 1836 the anti-slavery movement, destined to 
grow to such vast proportions, began to show itself 
in the Senate. The first contest came on the re- 
ception of petitions for the abolition of slavery in 
the District of Columbia. Mr. Calhoun moved 
that these petitions should not be received, but 
his motion was rejected by a large majority. The 
question then came on the petitions themselves, 
and, by a vote of thirty-four to six, their prayer 
was rejected, Mr. Webster voting with the minor- 
ity because he disapproved this method of dis- 
posing of the matter. Soon after, Mr. Webster 
presented three similar petitions, two from Massa- 
chusetts and one from Michigan, and moved their 
reference to a committee of inquiry. He stated 
that, while the government had no power whatever 
over slavery in the States, it had complete control 
over slavery in the District, which was a totally 
distinct affair. He urged a respectful treatment 
of the petitions, and defended the right of petition 
and the motives and characters of the petitioners. 



274 DANIEL WEBSTER 

He spoke briefly, and, except when he was charged 
with placing himself at the head of the petitioners, 
coldly, and did not touch on the merits of the 
question, either as to the abolition of slavery in 
the District or as to slavery itseK. 

The Southerners, especially the extremists and 
the nullifiers, were always more ready than any 
one else to strain the powers of the central govern- 
ment to the last point, and use them most tyran- 
nically and illegally in their own interest and in 
that of their pet institution. The session of 1836 
furnished a striking example of this characteristic 
quality. Mr. Calhoun at that time introduced 
his monstrous bill to control the United States 
mails in the interests of slavery, by authorizing 
postmasters to seize and suppress all anti- slavery 
documents. Against this measure Mr. Webster 
spoke and voted, resting his opposition on general 
grounds, and sustaining it by a strong and effec- 
tive argument. In the following year, on his way 
to the North, after the inauguration of Mr. Van 
Buren, a great public reception was given to him 
in New York, and on that occasion he made the 
speech in Niblo's Garden, where he defined the 
Whig principles, arraigned so powerfully the pol- 
icy of Jackson, and laid the foundation for the 
triumphs of the Harrison campaign. In the course 
of that speech he referred to Texas, and strongly 
expressed his belief that it should remain inde- 
pendent and should not be annexed. This led 
him to touch upon slavery. He said : — 



HKTUKN TO THE SENATE 275 

;'I frankly avow my entire unwillingness to do nn 
thing that shall extend the slavery of thUT' ^' 

guage which has been adopted bv dkH ' 

themselves citizens of slaved Mi.^ luZ'^tl .TT' 
r • ? t:r 'V-- - --C/ts in et 

con::Lorijt2Sr^rroii::^ 

gave ,t solemn guaranties. To the iuuZZt ^it 
o^ v.- • • • i^ut when we come to sueak of 

ate:^a:;e:t''^'^^!:r"^^^^ -r - ^^ 

TT.,-f ^ _,f 'P^'^^- • • • In my opinion, the people of the 

new, vastly extensive, and slaveholding counti-y lar..e 
enough for half a dozen or a dozen 'states/in my 
op.n,on, they ought not to consent to it. . . . On Z 

n.un.ty ,s already strongly excited. The subject has 
not only attracted attention as a question ot poUti b^ 
.t has struck a far deeper-toned chord. It L .rl ed 

Jeed and 1 tt."""™" "' "''"■ "" '' '' ^"^ "-• '" 
c ally has he a very erroneous estin.ate of the characlr 

,i„f rt- "/•''" r"*'^'"'"'^"'''-^''^ t'-t - feel- 
ing of this kmd .s to be trifled with or despised. It will 

assuredly cause itself to be respected. It n,ay be rea- 

sonea w,th .t n,ay be made willing -I believe it is 

em-rely wdl,ng_t„ f„lfi„ all existing engagements and 

all existing duties, to uphold and defen<l the Constitution 



276 DANIEL WEBSTER 

as it is established, with whatever regrets about some 
provisions which it does actually contain. But to coerce 
it into silence, to endeavor to restrain its free expres- 
sion, to seek to compress and confine it, warm as it is 
and more heated as such endeavors would inevitably 
render it, — should this be attempted, I know nothing, 
even in the Constitution or in the Union itself, which 
would not be endangered by the explosion which might 
foUow." 

Thus Mr. Webster spoke on slavery and upon 
the agitation against it, in 1837. The tone was 
the same as in 1820, and there was the same ring 
of dignified courage and unyielding opposition to 
the extension and perpetuation of a crying evil. 

In the session of Congress preceding the speech 
at Niblo's Garden, numerous petitions for the 
abolition of slavery in the District had been of- 
fered. Mr. Webster reiterated his views as to 
the proper disposition to be made of them; but 
announced that he had no intention of expressing 
an opinion as to the merits of the question. Ob- 
jections were made to the reception of the peti- 
tions, the question was stated on the reception, 
and the whole matter was laid on the table. The 
Senate, under the lead of Calhoun, was trying to 
shut the door against the petitioners, and stifle 
the right of petition; and there was no John 
Quincy Adams among them to do desperate battle 
against this infamous scheme. 

In the following year came more petitions, and 
Mr. Calhoun now attempted to stop the agitation 



RETURN TO THE SENATE 277 

in another fashion. He introduced a resolution 
to the effect that these petitions were a direct and 
dangerous attack on the "institution " of the slave- 
holding States. This Mr. Clay improved in a 
substitute, which stated that any act or measure 
of Congress looking to the abolition of slavery in 
the District would be a violation of the faith im- 
plied in the cession by Virginia and Maryland, — 
a just cause of alarm to. the South, and having 
a direct tendency to disturb and endanger the 
Union. Mr. Webster wrote to a friend that this 
was an attempt to make a new Constitution, and 
that the proceedings of the Senate, when they 
passed the resolutions, drew a line which could 
never be obliterated. Mr. Webster also spoke 
briefly against the resolutions, confining himself 
strictly to demonstrating the absurdity of Mr. 
Clay's doctrine of "plighted faith." He disclaimed 
carefully, and even anxiously, any intention of 
expressing an opinion on the merits of the ques- 
tion ; although he mentioned one or two reasonable 
arguments against abolition. The resolutions were 
adopted by a large majority, Mr. Webster voting 
against them on the grounds set forth in his 
speech. Whether the approaching presidential 
election had any connection with his careful avoid- 
ance of everything except the constitutional jx)int, 
which contrasted so strongly with his recent utter- 
ances at Niblo's Garden, it is, of course, im])ossi- 
ble to determine. John Quincy Adams, who ]ia<l 
no love for Mr. Webster, and who was then in 



278 DANIEL WEBSTER 

the midst of his desperate struggle for the right 
of petition, says, in his Diary, in March, 1838, 
speaking of the delegation from Massachusetts : — 

*' Their policy is dalhance with the South ; and they 
care no more for the right of petition than is absolutely 
necessary to satisfy the feeling of their constituents. 
They are jealous of Gushing, who, they think, is playing 
a douhle game. They are envious of my position as 
the supporter of the right of petition ; and they truckle 
to the South to court their favor for Webster. He is 
now himself tampering with the South on the slaveiy 
and the Texas question." 

This harsh judgment may or may not be correct, 
but it shows very plainly that Mr. Webster's cau- 
tion in dealing with these topics was noticed and 
criticised at this period. The annexation of Texas, 
moreover, which he had so warmly opposed, seemed 
to him, at this juncture, and not without reason, 
to be less threatening, owing to the course of 
events in the young republic. Mr. Adams did 
not, however, stand alone in thinking that Mr. 
Webster, at this time, was lukewarm on the sub- 
ject. In 1839 Mr. Giddings says "that it was 
impossible for any man, who submitted so quietly 
to the dictation of slavery as Mr. Webster, to 
command that influence which was necessary to 
constitute a successful politician." How much 
Mr. Webster's attitude had weakened, just at this 
period, is shown better by his own action than by 
anything Mr. Giddings could say. The ship En- 
terprise, engaged in the domestic slave trade from 



RETURN TO THE SENATE 279 

Virginia to New Orleans, had been driven into 
Port Hamilton, and the slaves had escaped. Great 
Britain refused compensation. Thereupon, early 
in 1840, Mr. Calhoun introduced resolutions de- 
claratory of international law on this point, and 
setting forth that England had no right to inter- 
fere with, or to permit, the escape of slaves from 
vessels driven into her ports. The resolutions 
were idle, because they could effect nothing, and 
mischievous because they represented that the sen- 
timent of the Senate was in favor of protecting 
the slave trade. Upon these resolutions, absurd 
in character and barbarous in principle, Mr. Web- 
ster did not even vote. There is a strange con- 
trast here between the splendid denunciation of the 
Plymouth oration and this utter lack of opinion, 
upon resolutions designed to create a sentiment 
favorable to the protection of slave ships engaged 
in the domestic traffic. Soon afterwards, when 
Mr. Webster was secretary of state, he advanced 
much the same doctrine in the discussion of tlie 
Creole case, and his letter was approved by Cal- 
houn. There may be merit in the legal arginnent, 
but the character of the cargo, which it was sought 
to protect, put it beyond the reach of law. We 
have no need to go farther than the Plymouth 
oration to find the true character of the trade in 
human beings as carried on upon the high seas. 

After leaving the cabinet, and resuming liis law 
practice, Mr. Webster, of course, continued to 
watch with attention the progress of events. The 



280 DANIEL WEBSTER 

formation of the Liberty party, in the summer of 
1843, appeared to him a very grave circumstance. 
He had always understood the force of the anti- 
slavery movement at the North, and it was with 
much anxiety that he now saw it take definite 
shape, and assume extreme grounds of opposition. 
This feeling of anxiety was heightened when he 
discovered, in the following winter, while in at- 
tendance upon the Supreme Court at Washington, 
the intention of the administration to bring about 
the annexation of Texas, and spring the scheme 
suddenly upon the country. This policy, with its 
consequence of an enormous extension of slave 
territory, Mr. Webster had always vigorously and 
consistently opposed, and he was now thoroughly 
alarmed. He saw what an effect the annexation 
would produce upon the anti-slavery movement, 
and he dreaded the results. He therefore procured 
the introduction of a resolution in Congress against 
annexation ; wrote some articles in the newspapers 
against it himself ; stirred up his friends in Wash- 
ington and New York to do the same, and endeav- 
ored to start public meetings in Massachusetts. 
His friends in Boston and elsewhere, and the 
Whigs generally, were disposed to think his alarm 
ill-founded. They were absorbed in the coming 
presidential election, and were too ready to do 
Mr. Webster the injustice of supposing that his 
views upon the probability of annexation sprang 
from jealousy of Mr. Clay. The suspicion was 
unfounded and unfair. Mr. Webster was wholly 



RETURN TO THE SENATE 281 

right and perfectly sincere. lie did a good deal 
in an attempt to rouse the North. The only criti- 
cism to be made is that he did not do more. One 
public meeting would have been enough, if he had 
spoken frankly, declared that he knew, no matter 
how, that annexation was contemplated, and had 
then denounced it as he did at Niblo's Garden. 
"One blast upon his bugle-horn were worth a 
thousand men." Such a speech would have b^n 
listened to throughout the length and breadth of 
the land ; but perhaps it was too much to expect 
this of him in view of his delicate relations with 
Mr. Clay. At a later period, in the course of the 
campaign, he denounced annexation and the in- 
crease of slave territory, but unfortunately it was 
then too late. The Whigs had preserved silence 
on the subject at their convention, and it was diffi- 
cult to deal with it without reflecting on their can- 
didate. Mr. Webster vindicated his own position 
and his own wisdom, but the mischief could not 
then be averted. The annexation of Texas after 
the rejection of the treaty in 1844 was carried 
through, nearly a year later, by a mixture of trick- 
ery and audacity in the last hours of the Tyler 
administration. 

Four days after the consummation of this pro- 
ject Mr. Webster took his seat in the Senate, and 
on March 11 wrote to his son that, ''while we feel 
as we ought about the annexation of Texas, wo 
ought to keep in view the true grounds of objec- 
tion to that measure. Those grounds are, — want 



282 DANIEL WEBSTER 

of constitutional power, — danger of too great an 
extent of territory, and opposition to tlie increase 
of slavery and slave representation. It was pro- 
perly considered, also, as a measure tending to pro- 
duce war." He then goes on to argue that Mexico 
had no good cause for war ; but it is evident that 
he already dreaded just that result. When Con- 
gress assembled again, in the following December, 
the first matter to engage their attention was the 
admission of Texas as a State of the Union. It 
was impossible to prevent the passage of the reso- 
lution, but Mr. Webster stated his objections to 
the measure. His speech was brief and very mild 
in tone, if compared with the language which he 
had frequently used in regard to the annexation. 
He expressed his opposition to this method of 
obtaining new territory by resolution instead of 
treaty, and to acquisition of territory as foreign 
to the true spirit of the republic, and as endanger- 
ing the Constitution and the Union by increasing 
the already existing inequality of representation, 
and extending the area of slavery. He dwelt on 
the inviolability of slavery in the States, and did 
not touch upon the evils of the system itself. 

By the following spring the policy of Mr. Polk 
had culminated, intrigue had done its perfect work, 
hostilities had been brought on with Mexico, and 
in May Congress was invited to declare a war 
which the administration had taken care should 
already exist. Mr. Webster was absent at this 
time, and did not vote on the declaration of war; 



RETURN TO THE SENATE ^83 

and when he returned he confined liimself to dis- 
cussing the war measures, and to urging the cessa- 
tion of hostilities, and the renewal of efforts to 
obtain peace. 

The next session — that of the winter of 1846- 
47 — was occupied, of course, almost entirely with 
the affairs of the war. In these measures Mr. 
Webster took scarcely any part; but toward the 
close of the session, when the terms on which the 
war should be concluded were brought up, he 
again came forward. February 1, 1847, Mr. 
Wilmot of Pennsylvania introduced the famous 
proviso which bears his name, as an amendment 
to the bill appropriating three millions of dollars 
for extraordinary expenses. By this proviso sla- 
very was to be excluded from all territory there- 
after acquired or annexed by the United States. 
A fortnight later Mr. Webster, who was opposed 
to the acquisition of more territory on any terms, 
introduced two resolutions in the Senate, declaring 
that the war ought not to be prosecuted for the 
acquisition of territory, and that Mexico sliould 
be informed that we did not aim at seizing her 
domain. A similar resolution was offered by Mr. 
Berrien of Georgia, and defeated by a party vote. 
On this occasion Mr. Webster spoke with great 
force and in a tone of solemn warning against the 
whole policy of territorial aggrandizement. He 
denounced all tliat liad been done in this direc- 
tion, and attacked with telling force the Northern 
democracy, which, while it opposed slavery and 



284 DANIEL WEBSTER 

favored the Wilinot Proviso, was yet ready to admit 
new territory, even without the proviso. His at- 
titude at this time, in opposition to any further 
acquisition of territory on any terms, was strong 
and determined, but his policy was a terrible con- 
fession of weakness. It amounted to saying that 
we must not acquire territory because we had not 
sufficient courage to keep slavery out of it. The 
Whigs were in a minority, however, and Mr. 
Webster could effect nothing. When the Wilmot 
Proviso came before the Senate Mr. Webster voted 
for it, but it was defeated, and the way was clear 
for Mr. Polk and the South to bring in as much 
territory as they could get, free of all conditions 
which could interfere with the extension of slavery. 
In September, 1847, after speaking and voting as 
has just been described in the previous session of 
Congress, Mr. Webster addressed the Whig con- 
vention at Springfield on the subject of the Wilmot 
Proviso. What he then said is of great impor- 
tance in any comparison which may be made be- 
tween his earlier views and those which he after- 
wards put forward, in March, 1850, on the same 
subject. The passage is as follows : — 

" We hear much just now of a panacea for the dan- 
gers and evils of slavery and slave annexation, which 
they call the ' Wilinot Proviso.' That certainly is a just 
sentiment, but it is not a sentiment to found any new 
party upon. It is not a sentiment on which Massachu- 
setts Whigs differ. There is not a man in this hall who 
holds to it more firmly than I do, nor one who adheres 
to it more than another. 



RETURN TO THE SENATE 285 

" I feel some little interest in this matter, sir. Did I 
not commit myself in 1837 to the whole doctrine, fully, 
entirely ? And I must be permitted to say that I can- 
not quite consent that more recent discoverers should 
claim the merit, and take out a patent. 

" I deny the priority of their invention. Allow me 
to say, sir, it is not their thunder. 

" There is no one who can complain of the North for 
resisting the increase of slave representation, because it 
gives power to the minority in a manner inconsistent 
with the principles of our government. What is past 
must stand ; what is established must stand ; and with 
the same firmness with which I shall resist every plan 
to augment the slave representation, or to bring the 
Constitution into hazard by attempting to extend our 
dominions, shall I contend to allow existing rights to 
remain. 

" Sir, I can only say that, in my judgment, we are to 
use the first, the last, and every occasion which occurs, 
in maintaining our sentiments against the extension of 
the slave power." 

In the following winter Mr. Webster continued 
his policy of opposition to all acquisitions of terri- 
tory. Although the cloud of domestic sorrow was 
already upon him, he spoke against the legislative 
powers involved in the "Ten Regiment" Bill, and 
on the 23d of March, after the ratification of the 
treaty of peace, which carried with it large cessions 
of territory, he delivered a long and elaborate 
speech on the ''Objects of the Mexican War." 
The weight of his speech was directed against the 
acquisition of territory, on account of its effect 



286 DANIEL WEBSTER 

on the Constitution, and the increased inequality 
of representation which it involved. He referred 
to the plan of cutting up Texas so as to obtain 
ten senators, as "borough -monger ing" on a grand 
scale, a course which he proposed to resist to the 
last; and he concluded by denouncing the whole 
project as one calculated to turn the Constitution 
into a curse rather than a blessing. "I resist it 
to-day and always," he said. "Whoever falters 
or whoever flies, I continue the contest." 

In June General Taylor was nominated, and 
soon after Mr. Webster left Washington, although 
Congress was still in session. He returned in 
August, in time to take part in the settlement of 
the Oregon question. The South, with customary 
shrewdness, was endeavoring to use the territorial 
organization of Oregon as a lever to help them in 
their struggle to gain control of the new conquests. 
A bill came up from the House with no provision 
in regard to slavery, and Mr. Douglas carried an 
amendment to it, declaring the Missouri Compro- 
mise to be in full force in Oregon. The House 
disagreed, and, on the question of receding, Mr. 
Webster took occasion to speak on the subject of 
slavery in the territories. He was disgusted with 
the nomination of Taylor and with the cowardly 
silence of the Whigs on the question of the exten- 
sion of slavery. In this frame of mind he made 
one of the strongest and best speeches he ever de- 
livered on this topic. He denied that slavery was 
an "institution; " he denied that the local right to 



RETURN TO THE SENATE 287 

hold slaves implied the right of the owner to carry 
them with him and keep them in slavery on free 
soil; he stated in the strongest possible manner 
the right of Congress to control slavery or to pro- 
hibit it in the territories; and he concluded with 
a sweeping declaration of his opposition to any 
extension of slavery or any increase of slave repre- 
sentation. The Oregon bill finally passed under 
the pressure of the "Free-Soil " nominations, with 
a clause inserted in the House, embodying substan- 
tially the principles of the Wilmot Proviso. 

When Congress adjourned, Mr. Webster re- 
turned to Marshfield, where he made the speech 
on the nomination of General Taylor. It was a 
crisis in his life. At that moment he could have 
parted with the Whigs and put himself at the head 
of the constitutional anti-slavery party. The Free- 
Soilers had taken the very ground against the ex- 
tension of slavery which he had so long occupied. 
He could have gone consistently, he could have 
separated from the Whigs on a great question of 
principle, and such a course would have been no 
stronger evidence of personal disappointment than 
was afforded by the declaration that the nomina- 
tion of Taylor was one not fit to be made. ^Mr. 
Webster said that he fully concurred in the main 
object of the Buffalo Convention, that he was as 
good a Free-Soiler as any of thcni, but that tlie 
Free-Soil party presented nothing new or valu- 
able, and he did not believe in Mr. Van Buren. 
He then said it was not true that General Taylor 



288 DANIEL WEBSTER 

was nominated by the South, as charged Ly the 
Free-Soilers ; but he did not confess, what was 
equally true, that Taylor was nominated through 
fear of the South, as was shown by his election by 
Southern votes. Mr. Webster's conclusion was, 
that it was safer to trust a slaveholder, a man with- 
out known political opinions, and a party which 
had not the courage of its convictions, than to run 
the risk of the election of another Democrat. Mr. 
Webster's place at that moment was at the head 
of a new party based on the principles which he 
had himself formulated against the extension of 
slavery. Such a change might have destroyed his 
chances for the presidency, if he had any, but it 
would have given him one of the greatest places in 
American history and made him the leader in the 
new period. He lost his opportunity. He did not 
change his party, but he soon after accepted the 
other alternative and changed his opinions. 

His course once taken, he made the best of it, 
and delivered a speech in Faneuil Hall, in which 
it is painful to see the effort to push aside slavery 
and bring forward the tariff and the sub -treasury. 
He scoffed at this absorption in "one idea," and 
strove to thrust it away. It was the cry of "peace, 
peace," when there was no peace, and when Daniel 
Webster knew there coidd be none until the mo- 
mentous question had been met and settled. Like 
the great composer who heard in the first notes of 
his symphony "the hand of Fate knocking at the 
door," the great New England statesman heard 



RETURN TO THE SENATE 289 

the same warning in the hoarse murmur against 
slavery, but he shut his ears to the dread sound 
and passed on. 

When Mr. Webster returned to Washin^rton, 
after the election of General Taylor, the strife had 
already begun over our Mexican conquests. The 
South had got the territory, and the next point 
was to fasten slavery upon it. The North was 
resolved to prevent the further spread of slavery, 
but was by no means so determined or so clear in 
its views as its opponent. President Polk urged 
in his message that Congress should not legislate 
on the question of slavery in the territories, but 
that if they did, the right of slaveholders to carry 
their slaves with them to the new lands should be 
recognized, and that the best arrangement was to 
extend the line of the Missouri Compromise to the 
Pacific. For the originator and promoter of the 
Mexican war this was a very natural solution, and 
was a fit conclusion to one of the worst presiden- 
tial careers this country has ever seen. The ])lan 
had only one defect. It would not work. One 
scheme after another was brought before the Sen- 
ate, only to fail. Finally, Mr. Webster intro- 
duced his own, which was merely to authorize 
military government and the maintenance of exist- 
ing laws in the Mexican cessions, and a consequent 
postponement of the question. The ]u-oposition 
was reasonable and sensible, but it fared little bet- 
ter than the others. The Southerners found, as 
they always did sooner or later, that facts were 



290 DANIEL WEBSTER 

against them. The people of New Mexico peti- 
tioned for a territorial government and for the 
exclusion of slavery. Mr. Calhoun pronounced 
this action "insolent." Slavery was not only to 
be permitted, but the United States government 
was to be made to force it upon the people of the 
territories. Finally, a resolution was offered "to 
extend the Constitution " to the territories, — one 
of those utterly vague propositions in which the 
South delighted to hide well-defined schemes for 
extending, not the Constitution, but slaveholding, 
to fresh fields and virgin soil. This gave rise to 
a sharp debate between Mr. Webster and Mr. 
Calhoun as to whether the Constitution extended 
to the territories or not. Mr. Webster upheld the 
latter view, and the discussion is chiefly interesting 
from the fact that Mr. Webster got the better of 
Mr. Calhoun in the argument, and as an example 
of the hitter's excessive ingenuity in sustaining 
and defending a more than doubtful proposition. 
The result of the whole business was, that nothing 
was done, except to extend the revenue laws of 
the United States to New Mexico and California. 

Before Congress again assembled, one of the 
subjects of their debates had taken its fortunes 
into its own hands. California, rapidly peopled 
by the discoveries of gold, had held a convention 
and adopted a frame of government with a clause 
prohibiting slavery. When Congress met, the 
senators and representatives of California were in 
Washington with their free Constitution in their 



RETURN TO THE SENATE 291 

hands, demanding the admission of their State 
into the Union. 

New Mexico was involved in a dispute with 
Texas as to boundaries, and if the chiim of Texas 
was sanctioned, two thirds of the disputed terri- 
tory would come within the scope of the annexa- 
tion resolutions, and be slaveholding States. Then 
there was the further question whether the AVilmot 
Proviso should be applied to New Mexico on her 
organization as a territory. 

The President, acting under the influence of 
Mr. Seward, advised that California should be 
admitted, and the question of slavery in the other 
territories be decided when they should apply for 
admission. Feeling was running very high in 
Washington, and there was a bitter and protracted 
struggle of three weeks, before the House suc- 
ceeded in choosing a speaker. The state legisla- 
tures on both sides took up the burning question, 
and debated and resolved one way or the other 
with great excitement. The Southern members 
held meetings, and talked about secession and 
about withdrawing from Congress. The air was 
full of murmurs of dissolution and intestine strife. 
The situation was grave and even threatening. 

In this state of affairs Mr. Clay, now an old 
man, and with but a short term of life before hira, 
resolved to try once more to solve the problem and 
tide over the dangers by a grand compromise. 
The main features of his })lan were : the admis- 
sion of California with her free Constitution ; the 



292 DANIEL WEBSTER 

oro-anization of territorial governments in the Mex- 
ican conquests without any reference to slavery; 
the adjustment of the Texan boundary; a guaranty 
of the existence of slavery in the District of Co- 
lumbia until Maryland should consent to its aboli- 
tion ; the prohibition of the slave trade in the Dis- 
trict ; provision for the more effectual enforcement 
of the Fugitive Slave Law, and a declaration that 
Congress had no power over the slave trade be- 
tween the slaveholding States. As the admission 
of California was certain, the proposition to bring 
about the prohibition of the slave trade in the 
District was the only concession to the North. 
Everything else was in the interest of the South ; 
but then that was always the manner in which 
compromises with slavery were made. They could 
be effected in no other way. 

This outline Mr. Clay submitted to Mr. Web- 
ster January 21, 1850, and Mr. Webster gave it 
his full approval, subject, of course, to further 
and more careful consideration. February 5 Mr. 
Clay introduced his plan in the Senate, and sup- 
ported it in an eloquent speech. On the 13th the 
President submitted the Constitution of California, 
and Mr. Foote moved to refer it, together with all 
matters relating to slavery, to a select committee. 
It now became noised about that Mr. Webster in- 
tended to address the Senate on the pending mea- 
sures, and on the 7th of March he delivered the 
memorable speech which has always been known 
by its date. 



TJiE SEVENTH OF MARCH bPEECTI 293 

It may be preiiiised that in a literary and rlietor- 
ieal point of view the speech of tlie 7th of Mareh 
was a fine one. The greater part of it is taken 
np with ar«riiinent and statement, and is very (piiet 
in tone. Imt the famons passage beginning " peaee- 
able secession," which came straight from the heart, 
and the peroration also, have the glowing elocpience 
which shone with so much splendor all through 
the reply to Hayne. The speech can be readily 
analyzed. With extreme calmness of lanjruaire 
Mr. Webster discussed the whole history of slavery 
in ancient and modern times, and under the Con- 
stitution of the United States. Ilis attitude is so 
judicial and historical, that if it is clear he disap- 
proved of the system, it is not equally evident that 
he condemned it. He reviewed the history of the 
annexation of Texas, defended his own consistency, 
belittled the Wihnot Proviso, admitted substan- 
tially the boundary claims of Texas, and declared 
that the character of every part of the country, so 
far as slavery or freedom was concerned, was now 
settled, either by law or nature, and that he should 
resist the insertion of the Wihnot Pi'oviso in re- 
gard to New Mexico, because it would be merely 
a wanton taunt and reproach to the South. He 
then spoke of the change of feeling and oi)inion 
both at the North and the South in recrard to 
slavery, and passed next to the question of mutual 
grievances. He de})icted at length tlie grievances 
of the South, including the tone of tlie Northern 
press, the anti -slavery resolutions of the legisla- 



294 DANIEL WEBSTKR 

ture, the utterances of the abolitionists, and the 
resistance to the Fugitive Slave Law. The last, 
which he thouglit the only substantial and legally 
remediable complaint, he dwelt on at great length, 
and severely condemned the refusal of certain 
States to com])ly with this provision of the Con- 
stitution. Then came tlie grievances, of the North 
against the South, wliich were dealt with very 
briefly. In fact, the Northern grievances, accord- 
ing to Mr. Webster, consisted of the tone of the 
Southern press and of Southern speeches which, it 
nuist be confessed, were at times a little violent 
and somewhat offensive. The short i)aragraph 
reciting the unconstitutional and high-handed ac- 
tion of the South in regard to free negroes em- 
ployed as seamen on Northern vessels, and the 
outragreous treatment of ]Mr. Hoar at Charleston 
in connection with this matter, was not delivered, 
Mr. Giddings says, but was inserted afterwards 
and before publication, at the suggestion of a 
friend. After this came the fine burst about se- 
cession, and a declaration of faith that the South- 
ern convention called at Nashville would prove 
patriotic and conciliatory. The speech concluded 
with a strong appeal in behalf of nationality and 
union. 

Mr. Curtis correctly says that a great majority 
of Mr. AVebster's constituents, if not of the whole 
North, disapproved this speech. He might have 
added that that majority has steadily increased. 
The popular verdict has been given against the 



THE Si:\KXTIl OF MAllCll SPKKCH 29.: 



Ttii of Miircli s])('(M'li, and tliat vcrdid lias jjasscd 
into history. Notliing can now 1h' said or written 
which will alter the fact that the people of this 
country wlio maintained and saved the Tnion have 
passed jndgnient n])on ^Ir. A\'el)ster and con- 
demned what he said on the 7th of March, ISoO, 
as wrong in principle and mistaken in policy. 
This opinion is not nniversal, — no oj)inion is, — 
bnt it is held by the great body of mankind who 
know or care anything about the subject, and it 
cannot be changed or substantially modified, be- 
cause subsequent events have fixed its place and 
worth irrevocably. It is only necessary, therefore, 
to examine very briefly the grounds of this adverse 
judgment, and the pleas put in against it by Mr. 
Webster and by his most devoted i)artisans. 

From the sketch which has been oiven of Mr. 
Webster's course on the slavery question, we see 
that in 1819 and 1820 he denounced in the stronir- 
est terms slavery and every form of slave trade; 
that while he fully admitted that Congress had 
no power to touch slavery in the States, he asserted 
that it was their riglit and their paramount duty 
absolutely to stop any further extension of slave 
territory. In 1820 he was opposed to any com- 
promise on this question. Ten years later he stood 
out to the last, unaffected by defeat, against the 
principle of compromise whitdi sacriiieed tlie riglits 
and the dignity of the general government to the 
resistance and threatened secession of a Stnte. 

After the reply to Hayne in 1830, Mr. Webster 



29G DANIEL WEBSTER 

became a staiuling caiulidate for the })rcsicloncy, 
or for the AVhiir nomination to that office. From 
that time forth the sliarp denunciation of slavery 
and traffic in slaves disappears, although there is 
no indication that he ever altered his original opin- 
ion on these points; but he never ceased, some- 
times mildly, sometimes in the most vigorous and 
sv^eeping manner, to attack and oppose the exten- 
sion of slavery to new regions, and the increase of 
slave territory. If, then, in the 7th of March 
speech, he was inconsistent with his past, such 
inconsistency must appear, if at all, in his general 
tone in regard to slavery, in his views as to the 
policy of compromise, and in his attitude toward 
the extension of slavery, the really crucial question 
of the time. 

As to the first point, there can be no doubt that 
there is a vast difPerence between the tone of the 
Phniouth oration and the Boston memorial toward 
slavery and the slave trade, and that of the 7th of 
March speech in regard to the same subjects. For 
many years Mr. Webster had had but little to say 
against slavery as a system, but in the 7th of 
March speech, in reviewing the history of slavery, 
he treats the matter in such a very calm manner, 
that he not only makes the best case possible for 
the South, but his tone is almost apologetic when 
speaking in their belialf. To the grievances of 
the South hfe devotes more than five pages of his 
speech, to those of the North less than two. As 
to the infamy of making the national capital a 



THE SEVENTH OF MARCH SPEECH 207 

great slave inai't, lie lias iiotliiug to say — although 
it was a matter which figured as one of the ele- 
ments in Mr. Clay's scheme. 

But what most shoctked the North in this connec- 
tion were his ntterances in regard to the Fugitive 
Slave Law. There can be no doubt that under 
the Constitution the South had a perfect riglit to 
claim the extradition of fugitive slaves. The legal 
argument in support of that right was excellent, 
but the Northern people could not feel that it was 
necessary for Daniel Webster to make it. The 
Fugitive Slave Law was in absolute conflict with 
the awakened conscience and moral sentiment of 
the North. To strengthen that law, and urge its 
enforcement, was a sure way to make the resistance 
to it still more violent and intolerant. Constitu- 
tions and laws will prevail over much, and alle- 
giance to them is a high duty, but when they come 
into conflict with a deep-rooted moral sentiment, 
and with the principles of liberty and humanity, 
they must be modified, or else they will be broken 
to pieces. That this should have been the case 
in 1850 was no doubt to be regretted, but it was 
none the less a fact. To insist upon the constitu- 
tional duty of returning fugitive slaves, to upbraid 
the North with their opposition, and to urge upon 
them and upon the country the strict enforcomont 
of the extradition law, was certain to cnd)ittcr and 
intensify the opposition to it. The statesmanlike 
course was to recognize the ground of Northern 
resistance, to show the South that a t^o violent 



298 DANIEL WEBSTER 

insistence upon their eonstitutioniil rights would 
be fatal, and to endeavor to obtain sueh conces- 
sions as would allay excited feelinj^s. Mr. Web- 
ster's strong argument in favor of the Fugitive 
Slave Law pleased the South, of course; but it 
irritated and angered the North. It promoted 
the very struggle which it ])roposed to allay, for 
it admitted the existence of only one side to the 
question. The consciences of men cannot be co- 
erced ; and when Mr. Webster undertook to do it 
he dashed himself against the rocks. People did 
not stop to distinguish between a legal argument 
and a defense of the merits of catching runaway 
slaves. To refer to the original law of 1793 was 
idle. Public opinion had changed in half a cen- 
tury ; and what had seemed reasonable at the close 
of the eighteenth century was monstrous in the 
middle of the nineteenth. 

All this Mr. Webster declined to recognize. 
He upheld without diminution or modification the 
constitutional duty of sending escaping slaves back 
to bondage; and from the legal soundness of this 
position there is no escape. The trouble was that 
he had no word to say against the cruelty and 
barbarity of the system. To insist upon the ne- 
cessity of submitting to the hard and repulsive 
duty imposed by the Constitution was one thing. 
To ur<:e submission without a word of sorrow^ or 
regret was another. The North felt, and felt 
rightly, that while Mr. Webster could not avoid 
admitting the force of the constitutional provisions 



THE SEVENTH OF MARCH SPKECH 209 

about fugitive slaves, and was oblioe,] to l)ow to 
their behest, yet to defend them without reserva- 
tion, to attack those wlio op])osed theni, and to 
urge tlie rigid enforcement of a Fugitive Slave 
Law, was not in consonance with his past, his 
conscience, and his duty to his constituents. The 
constitutionality of a Fugitive Slave La^v mav be 
urged and admitted over and over again, but this 
could not make the North believe that advocacy of 
slave catching was a task suited to Daniel Web- 
ster. The simple fact was that he did not treat 
the general question of slavery as he always had 
treated it. Instead of denouncinjr and dei)lorin«>- 
It, and striking at it wherever the Constitution 
permitted, he apologized for its existence, and 
urged the enforcement of its most obnoxious laws. 
This was not his attitude in 1820; this was not 
what the people of the North expected of him in 
1850. 

In regard to the policy of compromise there is 
a much stronger contrast between Mr. Webster's 
attitude in 1850 and his earlier course than in tlie 
case of his views on the general subject of slavery. 
In 1819, although not in pul)lic life, Mr. Web- 
ster, as is clear from the tone of the Boston memo- 
rial, was opposed to any comjiromise involving an 
extension of slavery. In 1832-33 he was the most 
conspicuous and unyiehling enemy of the ])ri)UMple 
of compromise in the country. He then took the 
ground that the time had come to test the strength 
of the Constitution and the Unicm, and that any 



300 DANIEL WEBSTER 

concession would have a fatally weakening effect. 
In 1850 he supported a compromise which was so 
one-sided that it hardly deserves the name. The 
defense offered by his friends on this subject — 
and it is the strongest point they have been able 
to make — is that these sacrifices, or compromises, 
were necessary to save the Union, and that — al- 
though they did not prevent ultimate secession — 
they caused a delay of ten years, which enabled 
the North to gather sufficient strength to carry 
the civil war to a successful conclusi(m. It is not 
difficult to show historically that the policy of 
compromise between the national principle and 
unla\^"ful o])position to that principle was an entire 
mistake from the very outset, and that if illegal 
and partisan state resistance had alwa3^s been put 
down with a firm hand, civil war might have been 
avoided. Nothing strengthened the general gov- 
ernment more than the well-judged and well-timed 
display of force by which Washington and Hamil- 
ton crushed the Whiskey Rebellion, or than the 
happy accident of peace in 1814, which brought 
the separatist movement in New England to a 
sudden end. After that period Mr. Clay's policy 
of compromise prevailed, and the result was that" 
the separatist movement was identified with the 
maintenance of slavery, and steadily gathered 
strength. In 1819 the South threatened and blus- 
tered in order to prevent the complete prohibition 
of slavery in the Louisiana purchase. In 1832 
South Carolina passed the nullification ordinance 



THE SEVEOTH OF MARCH SPEECH 301 

because slic suffered by tlie operation of a i)rotee- 
tive tariff. In 1850 a great advance had l)0(m 
made in their pretensions. Secession was threat- 
ened because the South feared tliat tlie ^Icxican 
conquests would not be devoted to the service of 
slavery. Nothing had been done, nothino- was 
proposed even, prejudicial to Soutliern interests; 
but the inherent weakness of slavery, and the mild 
conciliatory attitude of Northern statesmen, in- 
cited the South to make imperious demands for 
favors, and seek for positive gains. They suc- 
ceeded in 1850, and in 1860 they had reached the 
point at which they were ready to plunge the 
country into the horrors of civil war solely because 
they lost an election. They believed, first, that 
the North would yield everything for the sake of 
union, and secondly, that if there was a limit to 
their capacity for surrender in this direction, yet 
a })eople capable of so much submission in the 
past would never light to maintain the Union. 
The South made a terrible mistake, and was se- 
verely punished for it: but the compromises of 
1820, 1833, and 1850 furnished some excuse for 
the wild idea that the North woidd not and could 
not fight. Whether a strict adherence to the 
strong, fearless policy of Hamilton, whicli was 
adopted by Jackson and advocated by Webster in 
1832-33, would have prevented civil war, must, 
of course, remain matter of conjecture. It is at 
least certain that in that way alone coidd war liave 
been avoided, and that the Clay policy of comi>ro- 



302 DANIEL WEBSTER 

inise made war inevitable by encouraging slave- 
holders to believe that they could always obtain 
anything they wanted by a sufficient show of vio- 
lence. 

It is urged, however, that the policy of compro- 
mise having been adopted, a change in 1850 would 
have simply precipitated the sectional conflict. In 
judging Mr. Webster, the practical question, of 
course, is as to the best method of dealing with 
matters as they actually were and not as they 
might have been had a different course been pur- 
sued in 1820 and 1832. The partisans of Mr. 
Webster have always taken the ground that in 
1850 the choice was between compromise and se- 
cession; that the events of 1861 showed that the 
South, in 1850, was not talking for mere effect; 
that the maintenance of the Union was the para- 
mount consideration of a patriotic statesman; and 
that the only practicable and proper course was to 
compromise. Admitting fully that Mr. Webster's 
first and highest duty was to preserve the Union, 
it is perfectly clear now, when all these events 
have passed into history, that he took the surest 
way to make civil war inevitable, and that the 
position of 1832 should not have been abandoned. 
In the first place, the choice was not confined to 
compromise or secession. The President, the offi- 
cial head of the Whig party, liad recommended 
the admission of California, as the only matter 
actually requiring immediate settlement, and that 
the other questions growing out of the new terri- 



THE SEVENTH OF MARCH SPEECH 303 

torles should be dealt with as they arose. ^Ir. 
Curtis, Mr. Webster's biographer, says this was 
au impraeticable plan, because peace could not be 
kept between New ^Mexico and Texas, and because 
there was great excitement about the slavery ques- 
tion throughout the country. These seem very 
insufficient reasons, and only the first has any 
practical bearing on the matter. General Taylor 
said : Admit California, for that is an immediate 
and pressing duty, and I will see to it that peace 
is preserved on the Texan boundary. Zachary 
Taylor may not have been a great statesman, but 
he was a brave and skillful soldier, and an honest 
man, resolved to maintain the Union, even if he 
had to shoot a few Texans to do it. I lis ])olicy 
was bold and manly, and the fact that it was said 
to have been inspired by IVIr. Seward, a leader in 
the only Northern party which had any real prin- 
ciple to fight for, does not seem such a monstrous 
idea as it did in 1850 or does still to those who 
sustain Mr. Webster's action. That General Tay- 
lor's policy was not so wild and impracticable as 
Mr. Webster's friends would have us tliink, is 
shown by the fact that Mr. Benton, Democrat and 
Southerner as he was, but imbued with the vigor 
of the Jackson school, believed that each quest i(ui 
should be taken up by itself and settled on its own 
merits. A ])()licy wliieh seemed wise to three such 
different men as Taylor, Seward, and E.euton, 
could hardly have been so utterly itn practicable 
and visionary as Mr. Webster's partisans would 



304 DANIEL WEBSTER 

like tlu' world to believe. It was in fact one of 
the cases wliieh that extremely practical statesman 
Nicolo Macliiavelli had in mind when he wrote 
that, "l)an<^ers that are seen afar off are easily 
prevented; bnt protracting till they are near at 
hand, the remedies grow unseasonable and the 
malady incurable." 

It may be readily admitted that there was a 
gi'eat and perilous political crisis in 1850, as Mr. 
Webster said. In certain quarters, in the excite- 
ment of party strife, there was a tendency to de- 
ride Mr. Webster as a "Union-saver," and to 
take the ground that there had been no real danger 
of secession. This, as we can see now very plainly, 
was an unfounded idea. When Congress met, the 
danger of secession was very real, although ])er- 
ha})s not very near. The South, although they 
intended to secede as a last resort, had no idea 
that they should be brought to that point. ]\Ien- 
aces of disunion, ominous meetings and conven- 
tions, they probably calculated, would effect their 
purpose and obtain for them what they wanted, 
and subsequent events proved that they were per- 
fectly right in this opinion. On February 14 Mr. 
AVebster wrote to Mr. Harvey : — 

" I do not partake in any degree in those apprehen- 
sions which you say some of our friends entertain of the 
dissolution of the Union or the breaking up of the gov- 
ernment. I am mortified, it is true, at the violent tone 
assumed here by many persons, because such violence in 
debate only leads to irritation, and is, moreover, dis- 



THE SEVENTH OF MARCH SPEECH 305 

nediUible to tlie govcrniiient and tlie countrv. But 
there is no serious danger, be assured, and so assure our 
friends." 

The next day lie wrote to Mr. Furness, a leader 
of the anti-slavery party, expressing- his abhorrence 
of slavery as an institution, his nnwillingness to 
break up the existini^ })olitieal system to secure its 
abolition, and his belief that the whole matter 
must be left with Divine Providence. It is clear 
from this letter that he had dismissed any thought 
of assuming an aggressive attitude toward slavery, 
but there is nothing to indicate that he thought 
the Union could be saved from wreck only by 
substantial concessions to the South, l^etween 
the date of the letter to Harvey and March 7, ^Vlr. 
Curtis says that the aspect of affairs had mate- 
rially changed, and that the Union was in»serious 
peril. There is nothing to show that Mr. Web- 
ster thought so, or that he had altered the o])iniou 
which he had expressed on February 14. In fact, 
Mr. Curtis 's viev/ is the exact reverse of the true 
state of affairs. If there was any real and innne- 
diate danger to the Union, it existed on February 
14, and ceased immediately afterwards, on Feb- 
ruary 16, as Dr. Von Hoist correctly says, when 
the House of Representatives laid on the table the 
resolution of Mr. Root of Ohio, prohibiting the 
extensi<m of slavery to the territories. Hv tliat 
vote, the victory was won l)y the slave jxiwer, antl 
the peril of speedy disunion vanished. Nothing 
remained but to determine how nuich the South 



306 DANIEL \VP:BSTER 

would i^et from tlicii- victory, and liow hard a bar- 
gain tlu'v could drive. The admission of Califor- 
nia was no more of a concession than a resolution 
not to introduce slavery in Massachusetts would 
have been. All the rest of the c()m])romise })lan, 
with the single exception of the ])r()hibition of the 
slave trade in the District of C\)hun])Ia, was made 
np of concessions to the Southern and slaveholding 
interest. That Henry Clay should have originated 
and advocated this scheme was perfectly natural. 
However wrong or mistaken, this had been his 
steady and nnbroken policy from the outset, as 
the best method of preserving the Union and ad- 
vancing the cause of naticmality. Mr. Clay was 
consistent and sincere, and, however much he may 
have erred in his general theory, he never swerved 
from it. But with Mr. AVebster the case was 
totally different. He had opposed the principle 
of compromise from the beginning, and in 1833, 
when concession was more reasonable than in 
1850, he had offered the most strenuous and un- 
bending resistance. Now he advocated a compro- 
mise which was in reality little less than a com- 
plete surrender on the part of the North. On the 
general question of compromise he was, of course, 
grossly inconsistent, and the history of the time, 
as it appears in the cold light of the present day, 
shows i)lainly that, while he w^as brave and true 
and wise in 1833, in 1850 he was not only incon- 
sistent, but that he erred dee])ly in policy and 
statesmanship. It has also been urged in behalf 



THE SKVEXTII OF MARCH SPKIX'II 307 

of Ml-. Webster tliat ho went no faitlicr tliai) ilie 
Re])ul)lleans in 18(;0 in tlie way of concession, and 
that as in 1800 so in 1850, anytliin-' was pei missi- 
ve wliieli served to o-ain time. Jn ihr. iirst ])hioo, 
the f/f (iHoqnp ar<;uniont 2)roves notliiiiL;- -muX has 
no^wei-ht. In tlie second pLice, tlie situations in 
18r)0 and in 18G0 were very different. 

Tliere were at the former period, in reference 
to slavery, four parties in the country — tlie De- 
mocrats, the Free-Soilers, tlie Abolitionists, and 
the AVlii-s. The three first liad fixed and widely 
varying opinions; the last was trying- to live with- 
out opinions, and soon died. The pro-slavery 
Democrats were logical and jiractical; tlie Al)oli- 
tionists were equally logical but thorou^-hlv im- 
practicable and unconstitutional, avowed nullifiers 
and secessionists; the Free-Soilers were illogical 
constitutional, and perfectly practical. As Re- 
publicans, the Free-Soilers proved the correctness 
and good sense of their position bv brinoin<'- the 
great majority of the Northern peo])le to their 
support. But at the same time their position was 
a difficult one, for while they were an anti-slaverv 
party and had set on foot constitutional ojiposition 
to the extension of slavery, their fidelity to the 
Constitution com])elled them to admit the le^•a^Itv 
of the Fugitive Slave Law and of slavery in iIk^ 
States. They aimed, of course, first to check the 
extension of slavery and then to efface it bv -rad- 
ual restriction and full com])ensation to slavehold- 
ers. When they had carried tlie couiitrv in 186U, 



308 DAXIPX WEBSTER 

tlioy found tliemselves face to face witli a lireakiiiir 
Union and an impending war. Tliat many of them 
were seriously frightened, and, to avoid war and 
dissolution, would have made great concessions, 
cannot be questioned; but their controlling motive 
was to liold tilings together by any means, no 
matter how desperate, until they could get posses- 
sion of the government. This was the only possi- 
ble and the only wise ])olicy, but that it involved 
them in some contradictions in that winter of ex- 
citement and confusion is beyond doubt. History 
will judge the men and events of 18G0 according 
to the circumstances of the time, but nothing that 
happened then has any bearing on I\Ir. AVebster's 
conduct. He must be judged according to the 
circumstances of 1850, and the first and most ob- 
vious fact is, that he was not fighting merely to 
gain time and obtain control of the general gov- 
ernment. The crisis was grave and serious in the 
extreme, but neither war nor secession were immi- 
nent or immediate, nor did Mr. Webster ever as- 
sert that they were. He thought war and secession 
might come, and it was against this possibility and 
probability that he sought to provide. He wished 
to solve the great y)roblem, to remove the source 
of danger, to set the menacing agitation at rest. 
He aimed at an enduring and definite settlement, 
and that was the purpose of the 7th of March 
speech. His reasons — and of course they were 
clear and weighty in his own mind — proceeded 
from the belief that this wretched compromise 



THE SEVENTH OF MARCH SPEECH 309 

measure offered a wise, judielous, and permanent 
settlement of questions which, in their constant 
recurrence, threatened more and more the stal)ility 
of the Union. History has shown how woefully 
mistaken he was in this opinion. 

The last point to be considered in connection 
with the 7th of March speech is the ground tlien 
taken by Mr. Webster witli reference to the ex- 
tension of slavery. To this question the speech 
was chiefly directed, and it is the portion which 
has aroused the most heated discussion. What 
Mr. AVebster's views had always been on the 
subject of slavery extension every one knew then 
and knows now. He had been the steady and un- 
compromising opponent of the Southern policy, 
and in season and out of season, sometimes vehe- 
mently, sometimes gently, but always with firmness 
and clearness, he had declared against it. The 
only question is, whether he departed from these 
often-expressed opinions on the 7th of March. In 
the speech itself he declared that he had not abated 
one jot in his views in this respect, and he argued 
at great length to prove his consistency, wliich, 
if it were to be easily seen of men, certainly needed 
neither defense nor explanation. The crucial 
point was, whether, in organizing the new terri- 
tories, the princi])le of the Wilmot Proviso should 
be adopted as pait of the measure. This famous 
proviso Mr. Webster had declared in 1847 to repre- 
sent exactly his own views. He had then denied 
that the idea was the invention of any one man, 



310 DANIEL WEBSTER 

and scouted the notion that on this doctrine there 
could be any difference of opinion among Whigs. 
On ]\Iarch 7 he announced that he would not have 
the proviso attached to the territorial bills, and 
should oppose any effort in that direction. The 
reasons he gave for this ap})arent change were, 
that nature had forbidden slavery in the newly 
concj^uered regions, and that the proviso, under 
such circumstances, would be a useless taunt and 
wanton insult to the South. The famous sentence 
in wdiich he said that he "would not take pains 
uselessly to reaffirm an ordinance of nature, nor 
to reenact the will of God," was nothing but spe- 
cious and brilliant rhetoric. It was perfectly easy 
to employ slaves in California, if the people had 
not prohibited it, and in New Mexico as well, even 
if there were no cotton nor sugar nor rice planta- 
tions in either, and but little arable land in the 
latter. There was a classic form of slave labor 
possible in those countries. Any schoolboy could 
have reminded Mr. Webster of 

" Seius whose eight hundred slaves 
Sicken in Ilva's mines." 

Mining was one of the oldest uses to which slave 
labor had been applied, and it still flourished in 
Siberia as the occupation of serfs and criminals. 
Mr. Webster, of course, was not ignorant of this 
very obvious fact ; and that nature, therefore, in- 
stead of forbidding slave labor in the Mexican 
conquests, opened to it a new and almost unlimited 
field in a region which is to-day one of the great- 



THE ^^EVEXTIl OF MARCH SPEECH 311 

est mining countries in tlie world. Still less eould 
he have failed to know that this form of enijiloy- 
ment for slaves was eagerly desired by the Soutli; 
tliat the slaveholders fully reeognized their oppor- 
tunity, announced their intention of takiii"- advan- 
tage of it, and were particularly indignant at the 
action of California because it had closed to them 
this inviting field. Mr. Clingman of North Caro- 
lina, on January 22, when engaged in threatening- 
war in order to bring the North to terms, had said, 
in the House of Representatives: ^'But for the 
anti-slavery agitation our Southern slaveliolders 
w^ould have carried their negroes into the mines of 
California in such numbers that I have no doubt 
but that the majority there would have mad*? it 
a slaveholding State." i At a later period Mr. 
Mason of Virginia declared, in the Senate, that 
he knew of no law of nature which excluded sla- 
very from California. "On the contrary," he said, 
"if California had been organized with a territo- 
rial form of government only, the peoi)le of the 
Southern States would have gone there freely, and 
have taken their slaves there in great numbers. 
They w^ould have done so because the value of the 
labor of that class would have been aujjmented to 
them many hundred fold."^ These were the views 
of practical men and experienced slave owners v-ho 
represented the opinions of their constituents, and 
who believed that domestic slavery could be eni- 

^ Congressional Globe, Slst Cong^ress, Ist Session, p. 2lXi. 
^ Ibid., Appendix, p. 510. 



312 DANIEL WEBSTER 

ployed to advantage anywhere. Moreover, the 
Southern leaders openly avowed their opposition 
to securing any region to free labor exclusively, 
no matter what the ordinances of nature miirht be. 
In 1848, it must be remembered in this connec- 
tion, Mr. Webster not only urged the limitation 
of slave area, and sustained the power of Congress 
to regulate this matter in the territories, but he 
did not resist the final embodiment of the prin- 
ciple of the Wilmot Proviso in the bill for the or- 
ganization of Oregon, where the introduction of 
slavery was infinitely more unlikely than in New 
Mexico. Cotton, sugar, and rice were excluded, 
perhaps, by nature from the IMexican conquests, 
but slavery was not. It was worse than idle to 
allege that a law of nature forbade slaves in a 
country where mines gaped to receive them. The 
facts are all as plain as possible, and there is no 
escape from the conclusion that in o})posing the 
Wilmot Proviso, in 1850, Mr. Webster abandoned 
his principles as to the extension of slavery. He 
practically stood forth as the champion of the 
Southern policy of letting the new territories alone, 
which could only result in placing them in the 
grasp of slavery. The consistency which he la- 
bored so hard to prove in his speech was hopelessly 
shattered, and no ingenuity, either then or since, 
can restore it. 

A dispassionate examination of Mr. Webster's 
previous course on slavery, and a careful compar- 
ison of it with the ground taken in the 7th of 



THE SEVENTH OF MARCH SPEPXU 313 

March speech, sliows that he softened his utter- 
ances m regard to shivery as a system, and tliat 
he changed radically on the ])olicy of compromise 
and on the question of extending the area of sla- 
very. Tliere is a confnsed story that in tin- winter 
of 1847-48 he had given the anti -slavery leaders 
to understand that he proposed to come out on 
their ground in regard to Mexico, and to sustain 
Corwin in his attack on the Democratic policy, 
but that he failed to do so. The evidence on this 
point is entirely insufficient to make it of impor- 
tance, but there can be no doubt that in the winter 
of 1850 Mr. Webster talked with Mr. (nddlngs, 
and led him, and the other Free-Soil leaders, to 
believe that he was meditating a strong anti -sla- 
very speech. This fact was clearly shown in the 
recent newspaper controversy which grew out of 
the celebration of the centennial anniversary of 
Webster's birth. It is a little diiiheult to under- 
stand why this incident should have roused such 
bitter resentment among Mr. W^ebster's surviving 
partisans. To suppose that Mr. Webster made 
the 7th of March speech after long deliberation, 
without having a moment's hesitation in the mat- 
ter, is to credit him with a shameless disregard of 
princijile and consistency, of whicli it is imi>ossil)le 
to believe him guilty. lie undoubtedly hesitated, 
and considered dee])ly whether he should assume 
the attitude of 1833, and stand out unrelentingly 
ajrainst the encroachments of slavery. He tallanl 
with Mr. Clay on one side. He talked with Mr. 



314 DANIEL WEBSTER 

Ciiddings, and other Free-Soilers, on the other. 
AVith the latter the wish was no doubt father to 
the tliought, and they may well have iniagined 
tliat Mr. Webster liad determined to <ro with 
tliem, when he was still in doubt and merely try- 
ing the various positions. There is no need, how- 
ever, to linger over matters of tliis sort. The 
change made by Mr. Webster can be learned 
best by careful study of his own utterances, and 
of his whole career. Yet, at the same time, the 
greatest trouble lies not in tlie sliifting and incon- 
sistency revealed by an examination of tlie specific 
points which have just been discussed, but in the 
speech as a whole. In that speech Mr. Webster 
failed quite as nuich by omissions as by tlie opin- 
ions wliicli he actually announced. He was silent 
when he should have si)oken, and he s])oke when 
he should have held his peace. The speech, if 
exactly defined, is, in reality, a i)owerful effort, 
not for compromise or for the Fugitive Slave Law, 
or any other one thing, but to arrest the whole 
anti-slavery movement, and in that way put an 
end to the dangers which threatened the Union 
and restore lasting harmony between the jarring 
sections. It was a mad project. Mr. Webster 
might as well have attempted to stay the incoming 
tide at Marshfield with a rampart of sand as to 
seek to ch(H'k the anti-slaveiy movement by a 
speech. Nevertheless, he produced a great effect. 
His mind once made up, he spared nothing to win 
the cast. He gathered all his forces; his great 



t 



THE SEVENTH OF MARCH SPEECH :il5 

intellect, his splendid eloquence, liis fame wliich 
had become one of the treasured possessions of liis 
country, —all were given to the work. The I) >w 
fell with terrible force, and here, at last, we come 
to the real miscliief which was wrought. The 7th 
of March speech demoralized New Enn-land and 
the whole North. The abolitionists showed by 
bitter anger the pain, disappointment, and dismay 
which this speech brought. The Free-Soil party 
quivered and sank for the moment beneath the 
shock. The whole anti-slavery movement recoiled. 
The conservative reaction which Mr. Webster en- 
leavored to produce came and triumphed. Chiefly 
by his exertions the compromise policy was accepted 
and sustained by the country. The conservative 
elements everywhere rallied to his support, and by 
his ability and eloquence it seemed as if he had 
prevailed and brought the people over to his opin- 
ions. It was a wonderful trilnite to liis power 
and influence, but the triumph was hollow and 
short-lived. He had attempted to compass an im- 
possibility. Nothing could kill the principles of 
hum.an liberty, not even a speech by Daniel AVeb- 
ster, backed by all his intellect and knowknl<re, 
his eloquence and his renown. The anti-slavery 
movement was checked for tlie time, and pro- 
slaveiy democracy, the only other positive j)olitical 
force, reigned supreme. But amid tlic fallini:^ 
ruins of the Whig party, and the evanescent suc- 
cess of the Native Americans, the ])arty of luiman 
riglits revived; and when it rose again, taught by 



316 DANIEL WEBSTER 

the trials and misfortunes of 1850, it rose witli a 
strength of which Mr. Webster had never dreamed, 
and, in 185G, polled nearly a million and a half 
of votes for Fremont. The rise and final triumph 
of the Republican party was the condemnation of 
the 7th of March speech and of the policy which 
I)ut the government of the country in the hands 
of Franklin Pierce and James Buchanan. When 
the war came, inspiration was not found in the 
7th of IMarch speech. In that dark hour, men 
remembered the Daniel Webster who replied to 
Ilayne, and turned away from the man who had 
sought for peace by advocating the great compro- 
mise of Henry Clay. 

The disapprobation and disappointment which 
were manifested in the North after tlie 7th of 
March speech could not be overlooked. Men 
thought and said that Mr. Webster had spoken in 
behalf of the South and of slavery. AVhatever his 
intentions may have been, this was what the speech 
seemed to mean and this was its effect, and the 
North saw it more and more clearly as time went 
on. Mr. Webster never indulged in personal at- 
tacks, but at the same time he was too haughty a 
man ever to engage in an exchange of compliments 
in debate. lie never was in the habit of saying 
pleasant things to his opponents in the Senate 
merely as a matter of agreeable courtesy. In this 
direction, as in its opposite, he usually maintained 
a cold silence. But on the 7th of March he elabo- 
rately complimented Calhoun, and went out of his 



THE SEVENTH OF MARCH SPEECH 317 

way to flatter Virginia and Mr. Mason personally. 
This struck close observers with surprise, but it 
was the real purpose of the speech which went 
home to the people of the North. lie had advo- 
cated measures which with slight exceptions were 
altoirether what the South wanted, and the South 
so understood it. On the 30th of March ^Nlr. 
Morehead wrote to Mr, Crittenden that ^Mr. AVeb- 
ster's appointment as secretary of state would now 
be very acceptable to the South. No more bitter 
commentary could have been made. The people 
were blinded and dazzled at first, but they grad- 
ually awoke and perceived the error that had been 
committed. 

Mr. Webster, however, needed nothing from 
outside to inform him as to his conduct and its 
results. At the bottom of his heart and in the 
depths of his conscience he knew that he had made 
a dreadful mistake. He did not flinch. lie went 
on in his new path without apparent faltering. 
His speech on the compromise measures w ent far- 
ther than that of the 7th of March. But if we 
study his speeches and letters between 1850 and 
the day of his death, we can detect changes in 
them which show plainly enough that the writer 
was not at ease, that he was not master of that 
quiet conscience of which he boasted. 

His friends, after the first shock of sur]u-is(', 
rallied to his support, and he spoke frecpiently at 
union meetings, and undertook, by making im- 
mense efforts, to convince the country that the 



318 DANIEL WEBSTER 

compromise measures were right and necessary, 
and tliat the doctrines of the 7th of March speech 
ouirht to be sustained. In v>ursuance of this oh- 
ject, during the winter of 1850 and the summer of 
the following year, lie wrote several puhlic letters 
on the compromise measures, and he addressed 
great meetings on various occasions, in Xew Eng- 
land, New York, and as far south as Virginia. 
We are at once struck by a marked change in the 
character and tone of these speeches, which pro- 
duced a great effect in establishing the compromise 
policy. It had never been Mr. Webster's habit 
to misrepresent or abuse his opponents. Now he 
confounded the extreme separatism of the aboli- 
tionists and the constitutional opposition of the 
Free-Soil party, and involved all opponents of 
slavery in a common condemnation. It was will- 
ful misrepresentation to talk of the Free-Soilers as 
if they w^ere identical with the abolitionists, and 
no one knew better than Mr. AVebster the distinc- 
tion between the two, one being ready to secede to 
get rid of slavery, the other offering only a con- 
stitutional resistance to its extension. His tone 
toward his opponents was correspondingly bitter. 
When he first arrived in Boston, after his speech, 
and spoke to the great crowd in front of the Re- 
vere House, he said, "I shall support no agitations 
having tlieir foundations in unreal, ghostly ab- 
stractions." Slaveiy had now become "an unreal, 
ghostly abstraction," although it must still have 
appeared to the negroes something very like a hard 



THE SEVENTH OF MARCH SPEECH 319 

fact. TluM-e were men in that crowd, too, wlio 
had not forgotten tlie noble words with which Mr. 
Webster in 1837 had defended the cliaracter of 
the opponents of slavery, and the sound of this 
new gospel from his lips fell strangely on their 
ears. So he goes on from one union meetino- to 
another, and in speech after speech there is the 
same bitter tone which had been so foreign to him 
in all his previous utterances. The supporters of 
the anti-slavery movement he denounces as insane. 
He reiterates his opposition to slave extension, 
and in the same breath argues that the Union 
must be preserved by giving way to the South. 
The feeling is upon him tliat the old parties are 
breaking down under the pressure of this "ghostly 
abstraction," this agitation which he tries to prove 
to the young men of the country and to his fellow 
citizens everywhere is "wholly factitious." The 
Fugitive Slave Law is not in the form which he 
wants, but still he defends it and supports it. The 
first fruits of his policy of peace are seen in riots 
in Boston, and he personally advises with a Boston 
lawyer who has undertaken the cases against the 
fugitive slaves. It was undoubtedly liis duty, as 
Mr. Curtis says, to enforce and sup})ort the law 
as the President's adviser, but his personal atten- 
tion and interest were not required in slave cases, 
nor would they have been given a year Ix^fore. 
The AVilmot Proviso, that doctrine* wliich ho 
claimed as his own in 1847, when it was a senti- 
ment on which Whigs could not differ, he now 



320 DANIEL WEBSTER 

calls "a mere abstraction." He struggles to put 
slavery aside for the tariff, but it will not down at 
Lis bidding, and lie himself cannot leave it alone. 
Finally he concludes this compromise campaign 
with a great speech on laying the foundation of 
the capitol extension, and makes a pathetic appeal 
to the South to maintain the Union. They are 
not pleasant to read, these speeches in the Senate 
and before the people in behalf of the compromise 
policy. They are harsh and bitter; they do not 
rill"- true. Daniel Webster knew when he was 
delivering them that that was not the way to save 
the Union, or that, at all events, it was not the 
right way for him to do it. 

The same peculiarity can be discerned in his 
letters. The fun and humor which had hitherto 
run through his correspondence seem now to fade 
away as if blighted. On September 10, 1850, he 
writes to Mr. Harvey that since ]\Iarch 7 there 
has not been an hour in which he has not felt a 
"crushing sense of anxiety and responsibility." 
He couples this with the declaration that his own 
part is acted and he is satisfied; but if his anxiety 
was solely of a public nature, why did it date from 
March 7, when, prior to that time, there was much 
greater cause for alarm than afterwards. In every- 
thing he said or wrote he continually recurs to the 
slavery question, and always in a defensive tone, 
usually with a sneer or a fling at the abolitionists 
and anti-slavery party. The spirit of unrest had 
seized him. He was disturbed and ill at ease. 



THE SEVENTH OF MARCH SPEECH 321 

He never admitted it, even to liinisilf, but liis 
mind was not at peace, and he could not conceal 
the fact. Posterity can see the evidences of it 
plaiidy enough, and a man of his intellect and 
fame knew that with posterity the linal reckon iug 
must be made. No man can say that Mr. A\'eb- 
ster anticipated the unfavorable judgment which 
his countrymen have passed upon his conduct, but 
that in his heart he feared such a judgment cannot 
be doubted. 

It is impossible to determine with perfect accu- 
racy any man's motives in what he says or does. 
They are so complex, they are so often undefined, 
even in the mind of the man himself, that no one 
can pretend to make an absolutely correct analysis. 
There have been many theories as to the motives 
which led Mr. Webster to make the 7th of March 
speech. In the heat of contemporary strife his 
enemies set it down as a mere bid to secure South- 
ern support for the presidency, but this is a harsh 
and narrow view. The longing for the presidency 
weakened Mr. Webster as a public man from the 
time when it first took possession of him after 
the reply to Hayne. It undoubtedly had a weak- 
ening effect upon him in the winter of 1850, and 
had some influence upon the speech of the 7th of 
March. But it is unjust to say that it did more. 
It certainly was far removed from being a control- 
ling motive. His friends, on the other hand, (U- 
clared that he was governed solely by the highest 
and most disinterested ])atriotism, by the truest 



322 DANIEL WEBSTER 

wisdom. This explanation, like that of his foes, 
fails by going too far and being too simple. Ilis 
motives were mixed. His chief desire was to 
preserve and maintain the Union. He wished to 
stand forth as the great savior and pacificator. 
On the one side was the South, compact, aggres- 
sive, bound together by slavery, the greatest po- 
litical force in the country. On the other was a 
weak Free-Soil party, and a widely diffused and 
earnest moral sentiment without organization or 
tangible political power. Mr. Webster concluded 
that the way to save the Union and the Constitu- 
tion, and to achieve the success which he desired, 
was to go with the heaviest battalions. He there- 
fore espoused the Southern side, for the compro- 
mise was in the Southern interest, and smote the 
anti-slavery movement with all his strength. He 
reasoned correctly that peace could come only by 
administering a severe check to one of the two 
contending parties. He erred m attempting to 
arrest the one which all modern history showed 
was irresistible. It is no doubt true, as appears 
by his cabinet opinion recently printed, that he 
stood ready to meet the first overt act on the part 
of the South with force. Mr. Webster would not 
have hesitated to strike hard at any body of men 
or any State which ventured to assail the Union. 
But he also believed that the true way to prevent 
any overt act on the part of the South was by 
concession, and that was precisely the object which 
the Southern leaders sought to obtain. We may 



THE SEVENTH OF MARCH SPEECH 323 

grant all the })atriotism and all the sinoerc devo- 
tion to the cause of the Constitution which is 
claimed for him, but nothing can acquit ]\Ir. Web- 
ster of error in the methods which he chose to 
adopt for the maintenance of peace and the i)rescr- 
vation of the Union. If the 7th of ]\Iarch speech 
was right, then all that had gone before was false 
and wrong. In that speech he broke from his 
past, from his own principles and from the prin- 
ciples of New England, and closed his splendid 
public career with a terrible mistake. 



CHAPTER X 

THE LAST YEARS 

The story of the remainder of Mr. AVebster's 
]>ublic life, outside of and apart from the slavery 
question, can he quickly told. General Taylor 
died suddenly on July 9, 1850, and this event led 
to an immediate and complete reorganization of 
the cabinet. Mr. Fillmore at once offered the 
post of secretary of state to Mr. AVebster, who 
accepted it, resigned his seat in the Senate, and, 
on July 23, assumed his new position. No great 
neirotintion like that with Lord Ashburton marked 
this second term of office in thu l)e])artment of 
State, but there were a number of important and 
some very complicated affairs, which Air. AVcbster 
managed with the wisdom, tact, and dignity which 
made him so admirably fit for this high position. 

The best-known incident of this period was that 
which cave rise to the famous "Iliilsemann letter." 
President Taylor had sent an agent to Hungary 
to report upon the condition of the revolutionary 
government, with the intention of recognizing it if 
there were sufficient gi'ounds for doing so. AVhen 
the agent arrived, the revolution was crushed, and 
he reported to the President against recognition. 



THE LAST YEARS 325 

These papers were transmitted to the Senate in 
March, 1850. Mr. Hiilsemann, the Austrian 
charge^ thereupon comphiined of the action of our 
administration, and Mr. Chiyton, then secretary 
of state, replied that the mission of the agent had 
been simply to gather information. On receiving 
further instructions from his government, Mr. 
Hiilsemann rejoined to Mr. Clayton, and it fell 
to Mr. Webster to reply, which he did on Decem- 
ber 21, 1850. The note of the Austrian charge 
was in a hectoring and highly offensive tone, and 
Mr. Webster felt the necessity of administering 
a sharj^ rebuke. "The Hiilsemann letter," as it 
was called, was accordingly dispatched. It set 
forth strongly the right of the United States and 
their intention to recognize any de facto revolu- 
tionary government, and to seek information in 
all proper ways in order to guide their action. 
The argument on this point was admirabl}' and 
forcibly stated, and it was accompanied by a bold 
vindication of the American policy, and by some 
severe and wholesome reproof. Mr. Webster liad 
two objects. One was to awaken tlie people of 
Europe to a sense of the greatness of this country, 
the other to touch the national pride at lionu'. 
He did both. The foreign representatives leariitd 
a lesson which they never forgot, and which opened 
their eyes to the fact that we were no h)nger colo- 
nies, and the national })ride was also aroused. 
Mr. Webster admitted tliat the letter wiis, in 
some respects, boastful and rough. This was a 



326 DANIEL WP:BSTER 

fair criticism, and it may be justly said that such 
a tone was hardly worthy of the author. But, on 
the other hand, Hiilsemann's impertinence fully 
justified such a reply, and a little rough domineer- 
ing was, perhaps, the very thing needed. It is 
certain that the letter fully answered Mr. Web- 
ster's purpose, and excited a great deal of popular 
enthusiasm. The affair did not, however, end 
here. Mr, Hiilsemann became very mild, but he 
soon lost his temper again. Kossuth and the refu- 
gees in Turkey were brought to this country in a 
United States frigate. The Hungarian hero w^as 
received with a burst of enthusiasm that induced 
him to hope for substantial aid, which was, of 
course, wholly visionary. The popular excitement 
made it difficult for Mr. Webster to steer a pro2)er 
course, but he succeeded, by great tact, in showing 
his own sympathy, and, so far as possible, that of 
the government, for the cause of Hungarian inde- 
pendence and for its leader, without going too far 
or committing any indiscretion which could justify 
a breach of international relations with Austria. 
Mr. Webster's course, including a speech at a 
dinner in Boston, in which he made an eloquent 
allusion to Hungary and Kossuth, although care- 
fully guarded, aroused the ire of Mr. Hiilsemann, 
who left the coimtry, after writing a letter of in- 
dignant farewell to the secretary of state. Mr. 
W^ebster replied, through Mr. Hunter, with ex- 
treme coolness, confining himself to an approval 
of the gentleman selected by Mr. Hiilsemann to 
represent Austria after the latter's departure. 



THE LAST YEARS 307 

The other affairs wliich occupied Mr. AVel)ster's 
official attention at this time made less noise tlian 
that with Austria, hut they were more com])licated 
and some of them far more perilous to the i)eace 
of the country. The most important was that 
growing out of the Clayton-Bulwer ti-eaty in re- 
gard to the neutrality of the contemidated canal in 
Nicaragua. This led to a prolonged correspond- 
ence about the protectorate of Great Britain in 
Nicaragua, and to a withdrawal of her claim to 
exact port-charges. It is interesting to observe 
the influence which Mr. Webster at once obtained 
with Sit Henry Bulwer and the respect in wliich 
he was held by that experienced diplomatist. Be- 
sides this discussion witli England, there was a 
sharp dispute with Mexico about tlie right of way 
over the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, and the troubles 
on the Texan boundary before Congress had acted 
upon the subject. Then came the Lojiez invasion 
of Cuba, supported by bodies of volunteers enlisted 
in the United States, which, by its failure and its 
results, involved our government in a nunil)er of 
difficult questions. The most serious was the riot 
at New Orleans, where the Spanish consnlate was 
sacked by a mob. To render due reparation for 
this outrage witlumt wounding the national \)v\\c 
by apparent humiliation was no easy task. Mr. 
Webster settled evervtliimr, howev(M-, with a iu.!-- 
ment, tact, and dignity wliirh prevented wai- with 
Spain and yet excited no resentment at lionie. At 
a later period, when the Kossuth alYair was draw- 



328 DANIEL WEBSTER 

ing to an end, the perennial difficulty about the 
fisheries revived and was added to our Central 
American troubles with Great Britain, and this, 
together with the affair of the Lobos Islands, occu- 
pied Mr. Webster's attention, and drew forth some 
able and important dispatches during the summer 
of 1852, in the last months of his life. 

While the struggle was in progress to convince 
the country of the value and justice of the compro- 
mise measures and to compel their acceptance, 
another presidential election drew on. It was the 
signal for the last desperate attempt to obtain the 
Whig nomination for Mr. Webster, and it seemed 
at first sight as if the party must finally take up 
the New England leader. Mr. Clay was wholly 
out of the race, and his last hour was near. There 
was absolutely no one who, in fame, ability, i)ub- 
iic services, and experience could be compared for 
one moment with Mr. Webster. The opportunity 
was obvious enough; it awakened all Mr. Web- 
ster's hopes, and excited the ardor of his friends. 
A formal and organized movement, such as had 
never before been made, was set on foot to pro- 
mote his candidacy, and a vigorous and earnest 
address to the people was issued by his friends in 
Massachusetts. The result demonstrated, if de- 
monstration were needed, that Mr. Webster had 
not, ev(ni under the most favorable circumstances, 
the remotest chance for the presidency. His friends 
saw this plainly enough before the convention met, 
but he himself regarded the great prize as at last 



THE LAST YEARS 329 

surely witliin liis grasp. ]Mr. Clioate, who was to 
lead the Webster delegates, went to Washington 
the day before the convention assembled. lie 
called on Mr. W^ebster and found him so filk'd 
with the belief that he should be nominati'd that 
it seemed cruel to undeceive him. Mr. Choate, 
at all events, had not the heart for tlie task, and 
went back to Baltimore to lead the forlorn ho])e 
with gallant fidelity and witli an eloquence as bril- 
liant if not so grand as that of Mr. Webster him- 
self. A majority ^ of the convention divided their 
votes very unequ;dly between iVIr. Fillmore and 
Mr. Webster, the former receiving 133, tlie lat- 
ter 29, on the first ballot, while General Scott had 
131. Forty-five ballots were taken, witliout any 
substantial change, and then General Scott began 
to increase his strength, and was nominated on the 
fifty-third ballot, receiving 159 votes. ]Most of 
General Scott's supporters were opi>osed to resolu- 
tions sustaining the compromise measures, while 
those who voted for Mr. Fillmore and Mr. Web- 
ster favored that policy. General Scott owed his 
nomination to a compromise, which consisted in 
inserting in the platform a clause strongly approv- 
ing Mr. Clay's measures. Mr. Webster ex])ected 
the Fillmore delegates to come to him, an unlikely 

1 Mr. Curtis says a " great majority continued to divide tlu-ir 
votes betw(!eu Mr. Fillmore and Mr. \Vclisttr." The liiglust 
number reached by the combined Webster and Fillmore votes, on 
any one ballot, was 162, three moi-e than w:is received on the last 
ballot by General Scott, who, Mr. Curtis correctly says, obtained 
only a " few votes more than the necessary majority." 



330 DANIEL WEBSTER 

event when they were so niucli more numerous 
than his friends, and, moreover, they never showed 
the slightest inclination to do so. They were 
chiefly from the South, and as they chose to con- 
sider Mr. Fillmore and not his secretary the repre- 
sentative of compromise, they reasonably enough 
expected tlie latter to give way. The desperate 
stubbornness of ]Mr. Webster's adherents resulted 
in the nomination of Scott. It seemed hard that 
the Southern Whicfs should have done so little for 
Mr. Webster after he had done and sacrificed so 
much to advance and defend their interests. But 
the South was practical. In the 7th of i\Iarch 
speech they had got from Mr. Webster all they 
could expect or desire. It was quite possible, in 
fact it was highly probable, that, once in the presi- 
dency, he could not be controlled or guided by 
the slave power or by an}- other sectional influence. 
INIr. Fillmore, inferior in every way to Mr. Web- 
ster in intellect, in force, in reputation, would give 
them a mild, safe administration and be easily in- 
fluenced by the South. JNIr. Webster had served 
his turn, and the men whose cause he had advo- 
cated and whose interests he had protected cast 
him aside. 

The loss of the nomination was a bitter disap- 
pointment to Mr. Webster. It was the fashion 
in certain quarters to declare that it killed him, 
but this was manifestly absurd. The most that 
can be said in this respect was, that the excitement 
and depression caused by his defeat preyed ui)on 



THE LAST YEARS 331 

his mind and thereby facilitated the inroads uf 
disease, while it added to the clouds which dark- 
ened round him in those last days. But his course 
of action after the convention cannot be passed 
over without comment. He refused to frive his 
adhesion to General Scott's nomination, and he 
advised his friends to vote for Mr. Pierce, because 
the Whigs were divided, while the Democrats were 
unanimously determined to resist all attempts to 
renew the slavery agitation. This course was ab- 
solutely indefensible. If the Whig party was so 
divided on the slavery question that ]Mr. Webster 
could not support their nominee, then he had no 
business to seek a nomination at their hands, for 
they were as much divided before the convention 
as afterwards. He chose to come before that con- 
vention, knowing perfectly well the divisions of 
the party, and that the nomination might fall to 
General Scott. He saw fit to play the game, and 
was in honor bound to abide by the rules. He 
had no right to say "it is heads I win, and tails 
you lose." If he had been nominated he would 
have indignantly and justly denounced a refusal 
on the part of General Scott and his friends to 
support him. It is the merest sophistry to say 
that Mr. Webster was too great a man to be bound 
by party usages, and that he owed it to himself to 
rise above them, and refuse his su}ii)ort to a ])0(>r 
nomination and to a wrangling i)arty. If Mr. 
Webster could no longer act with the Whigs, then 
his name had no business in that convention at 



332 DANIKL WEBSTKll 

Baltimore, for the eonditlons were tlie same l)efore 
its meeting as afterward. Great man as he was, 
he was not too great to behave honorably; and his 
refusal to support Seott, after having been his 
rival for a nomination at the hands of their eom- 
mon party, was neither honorable nor just. If 
Mr. Webster had decided to leave the AVhigs and 
act independently, he was in honor bound to do 
so before the Baltimore convention assembled, or 
to have warned the delegates that such was his in- 
tention in the event of General Scott's nomination. 
He had no right to stand the hazard of the die, 
and then refuse to abide by tlie result. The Whig 
party, in its best estate, was not calculated to ex- 
cite a very warm enthusiasm in the breast of a 
dispassionate posterity, and it is perfectly true 
that it was on the eve of ruin in 1852. But it 
appeared better then, in the point of self-respect, 
than four years before. In 1848 the Whigs nomi- 
nated a successful soldier conspicuous only for his 
availability and without knowing to what party he 
belonged. They maintained absolute silence on 
the great question of the extension of slavery, and 
carried on their campaign on the personal popu- 
larity of their candidate. Mr. Webster was right- 
eously disgusted at their candidate and their nega- 
tive attitude. He could justly and properly have 
left them on a question of principle ; but he swal- 
lowed the nomination, *'not fit to be made," and 
gave to his party a decided and public support. 
In 1852 the Whigs nominated another successful 



THE LAST YEARS 333 

soldier, who was known to be a Whig, and who 
had been a candidate for their nomination before. 
In their platform they formally adopted the essen- 
tial principle demanded by Mr. Webster, and de- 
clared their adhesion to the compromise measures. 
If there was disaffection in regard to this declara- 
tion of 1852, there was disaffection also about the 
silence of 1848. In the former case, Mr. Webster 
adhered to the nomination; in the latter, he re- 
jected it. In 1848 he might still hope to be presi- 
dent through a Whig nomination. In 1852 he 
knew that, even if he lived, there would never be 
another chance. He gave vent to his disappoint- 
ment, put no constraint upon himself, prophesied 
the downfall of his party, and advised his friends 
to vote for Franklin Pierce. It was perfectly logi- 
cal, after advocating the compromise measures, to 
advise giving the government into the hands of 
a party controlled by the South. Mr. Webster 
would have been entirely reasonable in taking 
such a course before the Baltimore convention. 
He had no right to do so after he had souglit a 
nomination from the Whigs, and it was a breach 
of faith to act as he did, to advise his friends to 
desert a falling party and vote for the Democratic 
candidate. 

After the acceptance of the Department of 
State, Mr. Webster's health became seriously im- 
paired. His exertions in advocating tlie compro- 
mise measures, his official labors, and the increased 
severity of his annual hay-fever, — all contributed 



334 DANIEL WEBSTER 

to debilitate him. His iron constitution weakened 
in various ways, and especially by frequent periods 
of intense mental exertion, to which were super- 
added the excitement and nervous strain insepara- 
ble from his career, was beginning to give way. 
Slowly but surely he lost ground. His spirits 
began to lose their elasticity, and he rarely spoke 
without a tinge of deep sadness being apparent in 
all he said. In May, 1852, while driving near 
Marshfield, he was thrown from his carriage with 
much violence, injuring his wrists, and receiving 
other severe contusions. The shock was very great, 
and undoubtedly accelerated the progress of the 
fatal organic disease which was sapping his life. 
This physical injury was followed by the keen dis- 
appointment of his defeat at Baltimore, which 
preyed upon his heart and mind. During the 
summer of 1852 his health gave way more rapidly. 
He longed to resign, but Mr. Fillmore insisted on 
his retaining: his office. In Julv he came to Bos- 
ton, where he was welcomed by a great public 
meeting, and hailed with enthusiastic acclamations, 
which did much to soothe his wounded feelings. 
He stiU continued to transact the business of his 
department, and in August went to Washington, 
where he remained until the 8th of September, 
when he returned to Marshfield. On the 20th he 
went to Boston, for the last time, to consult his 
physician. He appeared at a friend's house, one 
evening, for a few moments, and all who then saw 
him were shocked at the look of iUness and suffer- 



THE LAST YEARS :\3o 

ing in Ills face. It was his last visit. lie went 
back to Marshfield the next day, never to return. 
He now failed rapidly. Ilis niglits were sleepless, 
and there were scarcely any intervtils of ease or 
improvement. The decline was steady and sure, 
and as October wore away the end drew near. 
Mr. Webster faced it with coura<^e, cheL'rfulness, 
and dignity, in a religious and trusting spirit, 
with a touch of the personal pride which was part 
of his nature. He remained perfectly conscious 
and clear in his mind almost to the very last mo- 
ment, bearing his sufferings with perfect fortitude, 
and exhibitinir tlie tenderest affection toward the 
wife and son and friends who watched over Iiini. 
On the evening of October 23 it became ap})arent 
that he was sinking, but his one wish seemed to 
be that he might be conscious when he was actually 
dying. After midnight he roused from an uneasy 
sleep, struggled for consciousness, and ejaculated, 
"I still live.'' These were his last words. Shortly 
after three o'clock the labored breatliing ceased, 
and all was over. 

A hush fell upon the country as the news of his 
death sped over the land. A great gap seemed to 
have been made in the existence of every one. 
Men remembered the grandeur of his form and 
the splendor of his intellect, and felt as if one of 
the pillars of the state had fallen. The profound 
grief and deep sense of loss ]n"oduced by his death 
were the highest tributes and the most convincing 
proofs of his greatness. 



336 DANIEL WEBSTER 

In accordance with liis wishes, all public forms 
and ceremonies were dispensed with. The funeral 
took place at his home on Friday, October 29. 
Thousands flocked to Marshtield to do honor to his 
memory, and to look for the last time at that noble 
form. It was one of those beautiful days of the 
New England autumn, when the sun is slightly 
veiled, and a delicate haze hangs over the sea, 
shining with a tender silvery light. There is a 
sense of infinite rest and peace on such a day 
which seems to shut out the noise of the busy 
world and breathe the s])irit of unbroken calm. 
As the crowds poured in through the gates of the 
farm, they saw before them on the lawn, resting 
upon a low mound of flowers, the majestic form, 
as impressive in the re})ose of death as it had been 
in the fullness of life and strength. There was a 
wonderful fitness in it all. The vault of heaven 
and the spacious earth seemed in their large sim- 
plicity the true place for such a man to lie in 
state. There was a brief and simple service at 
the house, and then the body was borne on the 
shoulders of Marshfield farmers, and laid in the 
little graveyard which already held the wife and 
children who had gone before, and where could be 
heard the eternal murmur of the sea. 

In Mav, 1852, Mr. Webster said to Professor 
Silliman: ''I have given my life to law and poli- 
tics. Law is uncertain and politics are utterly 
vain." It is a sad commentary for such a man to 



THE LAST YEARS 337 

have made on such a career, but it fitly represents 
Mr. Webster's feelings as the end of life ap- 
proached. His last years were not his most fortu- 
nate, and still less his best years. Domestic sor- 
rows had been the prelude to a change of policy, 
which had aroused a bitter opposition, and to the 
pangs of disappointed ambition. A sense of mis- 
take and failure hung heavily upon his spirits, and 
the cry of "vanity, vanity, all is vanity," came 
readily to his lips. There is an infinite pathos in 
those melancholy words which have just been 
quoted. The sun of life, which had shone so 
splendidly at its meridian, was setting amid clouds. 
The darkness which overspread him came from 
the action of the 7th of March, and the conflict 
which it had caused. If there were failure and 
mistake they were there. The presidency could 
add nothing, its loss could take away nothing from 
the fame of Daniel Webster. He longed for it 
eagerly ; he had sacrificed much to his desire for 
it; his disappointment was keen and bitter at not 
receiving what seemed to him the fit crown of his 
great public career. But this grief was purely 
personal, and will not be shared by posterity, wlio 
feel only the errors of those last years coming after 
so much glory, and who care very little for the 
defeated ambition which went with them. 

Those last two years awakened such fierce dis- 
putes, and had such an absorbing interest, that 
they have tended to overshadow the half century 
of distinction and achievement which preceded 



338 DANIEL WEBSTER 

them. Failure and disappointment on the part of 
such a man as Webster seem so great, that they 
too easily dwarf everything else, and hide from us 
a just and well proportioned view of the whole 
career. Mr. Webster's success had, in trutli, 
been brilliant, hardly equaled in measure or dura- 
tion by that of any other eminent man in our his- 
tory. For thirty years he had stood at the head 
of the bar and of the Senate, the first lawyer and 
the first statesman of the United States. This is 
a long tenure of power for one man in two distinct 
departments. It would be remarkable anywhere. 
It is especially so in a democracy. Tliis great 
success Mr. Webster owed solely to his intellectual 
power supplemented by great physical gifts. No 
man ever was born into the world better formed 
by nature for the career of an orator and states- 
man. He had everything to compel tliQ admira- 
tion and submission of his fellow men : — 

" The front of Jove himself ; 
An eye like Mars to threaten and command ; 
A station like the herald Mercury 
New-lig-hted on a heaven-kissing hill ; 
A combination and a form indeed, 
Where every god did seem to set his seal, 
To give the world assurance of a man." 

Hamlet's words are a perfect picture of Mr. Web- 
ster's outer man, and we have but to add to the 
description a voice of singular beauty and power 
with the tone and compass of an organ. The look 
of his face and the sound of his voice were in them- 
selves as eloquent as anything Mr. Webster ever 
uttered. 



THE LAST YEARS 339 

But the imposing presence was only the ontwurd 
sign of the man. Within was a massive and pow- 
erful intellect, not creative or ingenious, but with 
a wonderful vigor of grasp, capacious, penetrating, 
far-reaching. Mr. Webster's strongest and most 
characteristic mental qualities were weight and 
force. He was peculiarly fitted to deal with large 
subjects in a large way. He was by tem})eranient 
extremely conservative. There was nothing of the 
reformer or the zealot about him. He could main- 
tain or construct where other men had built; he 
could not lay new foundations or invent. We see 
this curiously exemplified in his feeling toward 
Hamilton and Madison. He admired them both, 
and to the former he paid a compliment which 
has become a familiar quotation. But Hamilton's 
bold, aggi'cssive genius, his audacity, fertility, and 
resource, did not appeal to Mr. Webster as did 
the prudence, the constructive wisdom, and tlie 
safe conservatism of the gentle Madison, whom he 
never wearied of praising. The same descri})tit>n 
may be given of his imagination, which was warm, 
vigorous, and keen, but not poetic. He used it 
well, it never led him astray, and was the secret 
of his most conspicuous oratorical triumphs. 

He had great natural pride and a strong sense 
of personal dignity, which made him always im- 
pressive, but ai)i)arently cold, and sometimes sol- 
emn in public. In his later years this solemnity 
degenerated occasionally into 2)omp()sity, to whicli 
it is always perilously near. At no time in his 



340 DANIEL WEBSTER 

life was he quick or excitable. He was indolent 
and dreamy, working always under pressure, and 
then at a high rate of speed. This indolence in- 
creased as he grew older; he would then postpone 
longer and labor more intensely to make up the 
lost time than in his earlier days. When he was 
quiescent, he seemed stern, cold, and latterly 
rather heavy, and some outer incentive was needed 
to rouse his intellect or touch his heart. Once 
stirred, he blazed forth, and, when fairly engaged, 
with his intellect in full play, he was as grand and 
effective in his eloquence as it is given to human 
nature to be. In the less exciting occupations of 
public life, as, for instance, in foreign negotiations, 
he showed the same grip upon his subject, the 
same capacity and judgment as in his speeches, 
and a mingling of tact and dignity which proved 
the greatest fitness for the conduct of the gravest 
public affairs. As a statesman Mr. Webster was 
not an "opportunist," as it is the fashion to call 
those who live politically from day to day, dealing 
with each question as it arises, and exhibiting 
often the greatest skill and talent. Still less was 
he a statesman of the type of Charles Fox, who 
preached to the deaf ears of one generation great 
principles which became accepted truisms in the 
next. Mr. Webster stands between the two classes. 
He viewed the present with a strong perception of 
the future, and shaped his policy not merely for 
the daily exigency, but with a keen eye to subse- 
quent effects. At the same time he never put 



THE LAST YEARS 341 

forward and defended single-handed a great y)rln- 
ciple or idea which, neglected then, was gradually 
to win its way and reign supreme among a succeed- 
ins: efene ration. 

His speeches have a heat and glow which we 
can still feel, and a depth and reality of thought 
which have secured them a place in literature. 
lie had not a fiery nature, although there is often 
so much warmth in what he said. He was neither 
high tempered nor quick to anger, hut he could be 
tierce, and, when adulation had warped him in 
those later years, he was capable of striking ugly 
blows which sometimes wounded friends as well as 
enemies. 

There remains one marked quality to be noticed 
in Mr. Webster, which was of immense negative 
service to him. This was his sense of humor. 
Mr. Nichol, in his recent history of American lit- 
erature, speaks of INIr. Webster as deficient in 
this respect. Either the critic himself is deficient 
in humor or he has studied only Webster's col- 
lected works, which give no indication of the real 
humor in the man. That Mr. Webster was not 
a humorist is unquestionably true, and although 
he used a sarcasm which made his opponents seem 
absurd and even ridiculous at times, and in his 
more unstudied efforts would provoke mirth by 
some happy and playful allusion, some felicitous 
quotation or ingenious antithesis, he was too stately 
in every essential respect ever to seek to make 
mere fun or to excite the laughter of his hearers 



342 DANIEL WEHSTKIl 

l)y (Icliberate exertions and witli nialiee afore- 
thought. He had, neveitlieless, a real and genu- 
ine sense of humor. We ean see it in lii.s letters, 
and it conies out in a thousand wavs in the details 
and incidents of his private life. AVlicn lie liad 
thrown aside the cares of professional or public 
business, he reveled in hearty, boisterous fun, 
and he had that sanest of (piallties, an honest, 
boyish love of pure nonsense. He delighted in a 
good story and dearly loved a joke, although no 
jester himself. Tliis sense of Imnior and apprecia- 
tion of the ridiculous, althougli tliey give no color 
to his i)ublished works, where, indeed, they would 
have been out of ])lace, improved his judgment, 
smootlu'd his patli through the world, and saved 
him from those blunders in taste and tliose follies 
in action which are ever the pitfalls for men with 
the fervid, oratorical temperament. 

This sense of Iiumor gave, also, a great charm 
to his conversation and to all social intercourse 
with him. He was a good, but never, so far as 
can be judged from tradition, an overbearing 
talker. He never ai)])ears to have crushed opposi- 
tion in conversation, nor to have indulged in mono- 
logue, which is so apt to be the foible of famous 
and successful men who have a solemn sense of 
their own dignity and importance. What I^ord 
jNIclbournc said of the iireat A\'hii'- historian, ''that 
lie wished he was as sure of anything as Tom 
!Macaulay was of everything," could not be applied 
to Mr. Webster. He owed his freedom from such 



THE LAST YKAKS :^:\ 

ii weakness ])artly, no doiiUt, to lils iKitinal iiido- 
lencc, but still more to tlie fiict that lie was not 
only no pedant, but not even a very learned man. 
lie knew no Greek, althougli lie was famillai- with 
Latin. His (flotations and allusions were chiefly 
drawn from Shakespeare, Milton, Homer, and the 
Bible, where he found what most appealed to him 
— simplicity and grandeur of thought and diction. 
At the same time, he was a great reader, and pos- 
sessed wdde information on a vast variety of sub- 
jects, which a clear and retentive memory })ut 
always at his command. The result of all this 
was that he was a most charming and entertaining 
companion. 

These attractions were heightened by his large 
nature and strong animal spirits. lie loved out- 
door life. lie was a keen sportsman and skillful 
fisherman. In all these ways he was healthy and 
manly, without any tinge of the mere student or 
public official. He loved everything that was 
large. His soul expanded in the free air and b<>- 
neath the blue sky. All natural scenery apj)ealcd 
to him, — Niagara, the mountains, the rnlling 
prairie, the great rivers, —but he found most con- 
tentment beside the limitless sea, amid brown 
marshes and sand-dunes, where the sense of infinite 
space is strongest. It was the same in regard to 
animals. He cared but little for horses or d.)--;, 
but he rejoiced in great herds of cattle, ami i-spe- 
cially in fine oxen, the embodiment of sh>w and 
massive streuirtli. In England tlie thiuu-^ \shich 



344 DANIEL WEBSTER 

cliic'fly appoaled to him were the Tower of London, 
AVestniiuster Al)bey, Snilthfiehl cattle market, 
and English agrieultnre. So it was always and 
everywhere. He loved monntains and great trees, 
wide Jiorizons, the ocean, the western plains, and 
the giant monnnients of literature and art. He 
rejoiced in his strength and the overflowing animal 
vigor that was in him. He was so big and so 
strong, so large in every way, that people sank 
into repose in his presence, and felt rest and con- 
fidence in the mere fact of his existence. He 
came to he regarded as an institution, and when 
he died men paused with a sense of helplessness, 
and wondered how the country would get on with- 
out him. To have fdled so large a space in a 
country so vast, and in a great, hurrying, and 
pushing democracy, implies a personality of a 
most imcommon kind. 

He was, too, sometliiiig more tlian a charming 
companion in private life. He was generous, lib- 
eral, hospitable, and deeply affectionate. He was 
adored in his home, and deeply loved his children, 
who were torn from him, one after another. His 
sorrow, like his joy, was intense and full of force. 
He had many devoted friends, and a still greater 
body of unhesitating followers. To the former he 
showed, through nearly all his life, the warm affec- 
tion which was natural to him. It was not until 
adulation and flattery had deei)ly injured him, and 
the frustrated ambition for the presidency had 
poisoned both heart and mind, that he became 



THE LAST YKARS [wr, 

dictatorial and overbearing. Not till then did he 
quarrel with those who had served and followed 
him, as when he slighted Mr. Lawrence for ex- 
pressing independent opinions, and refused to do 
justice to the memory of Story because it miglit 
impair his own glories. Tliey do not present a 
pleasant picture, these quarrels with friends, but 
they were part of the deterioration of the last 
years, and they furnish in a certain way the key 
to his failure to attain the presidency. The 
country was proud of Mr. Webster; proud of his 
intellect, his eloquence, his fame. He was the 
idol of the capitalists, the merchants, the lawyers, 
the clergy, the educated men of all classes in the 
East. The politicians dreaded and feared liim 
because he was so great, and so little in sympathy 
with them, but his real weakness was with the 
masses of the people. He was not popular in the 
true sense of the word. For years the Whig party 
and Henry Clay were almost synonymous terms, 
but this could never be said of Mr. Webster. His 
following was strong in quality, but weak numeri- 
cally. Clay touched the popular heart. Webster 
never did. The people were proud of lilm, won- 
dered at him, were awed by liim, but they did not 
love him, and that was the reason he was never 
])resident, for he was too great to succeed to the 
liigh office, as many men have, by happy oi- un- 
happy accident. There was also anotlicr feeling 
which is suggested by the differences with some 
of his closest friends. There was a lurking dis- 



346 DANIEL WEBSTER 

trust of Mr. Wel).ster\s sincerity. We can see it 
i)lainly in the correspondence of the Western 
Whigs, who were not, perhaps, wholly impartial. 
But it existed, nevertheless. There was a vague, 
ill-defined feeling of douht in the public mind; a 
sus})ici(ni that the spirit of the advocate was the 
ruling spirit in Mr. Webster, and that he did not 
believe with absolute and fervent faith in one side 
of any question. There was just enough correct- 
ness, just a sufficient grain of truth in this idea, 
when united with the coldness and dignity of his 
manner and with his greatness itself, to render 
impossible that popularity which, to be real and 
lasting in a democracy, must come from the heart 
and not from the head of the people, which must 
be instinctive and emotional, and not the offspring 
of reason. 

There is no occasion to discuss, or hold up to 
reprobation, Mr. Webster's failings. He was a 
splendid animal as well as a great man, and he 
had strong passions and appetites, which he in- 
dulged at times to the detriment of his health and 
reputation. Tliese errors may be mostly fitly con- 
signed to silence. But there was one failing which 
cannot be passed over in this way. This was in 
regard to money. His indifference to debt was 
perceptible in his youth, and for many years showed 
no sign of growth. But in his later years it in- 
creased with terrible rapidity. He earned twenty 
thousand a year when he first came to Boston, — 
a very great income for those days. His public 



THE LAST YKAKS .ii; 

oarcor Interfered, of eourse, wltli liis hnv practirc, 
but tliere never was a period when he eould not, 
witli reasonable economy, have hiid u}) sonietliing 
at the end of every year, and gradually amassed 
a fortune. lUit he not only never saved, lie lived 
habitually beyond his means. He did not become 
poor by his devotion to the public service, but by 
his own extravagance. He loved to spend money 
and to live well. lie had a fine library and hand- 
some plate; he bought fancy cattle; he kept open 
house, and indulged in that most expensive of all 
luxuries, "gentleman-farming." He never stinted 
himself in any way, and he gave away money with 
reckless generosity and heedless profusion, often 
not stopping to inquire who the reoij^ient of his 
bounty might be. The result was debt; tlien sub- 
scriptions among his friends to pay his debts; 
then a fresh start and more debts, and more sub- 
scriptions and funds for his benefit, and gifts of 
money for his table, and checks or notes for sev- 
eral thousand dollars in token of admiration of 
the 7th of March speech.^ This was, of course, 

^ The story of the gift of ten tlious.uid dollai-s in token of 
admiration of the 7th of Miirch speech, referreil to by Dr. Von 
Hoist {Const. Hist, of the United States), may be found in a vol- 
ume entitled, In Memoriam, B. Ogle Tayloe. p. 100, and is as 
follows: "My opulent and munificent friend and nei^'^hbor, Mr. 
William W. Corcoran," says Mr. Tayloe, "after tlie p. nis.il of 
Webster's celebrated March speech in defense of the l\)nstitiitiou 
and of Southern rights, inclosed to Mrs. Webster her husbatid's 
note for ten thousand dollars given liini for a loan to that aniount. 
Mr. Webster met Mr. (\)rcoran the same evening, at the I'nsi- 
dent's, and thanked him fur the ' princely favor.' Next day ho 



348 DANIEL WEBSTER 

utterly wrons; and demoralizing, but Mr. Webster 
came, after a time, to look upon sueh transactions 
as natural and proper. In the Ingersoll debate, 
Mr. Yancey 'accused him of being in the pay of 
tlie New England manufacturers, and his biogra- 
pher has replied to the charge at length. That 
Mr. AVebster was in the pay of the manufacturers 
in the sense that they hired him, and bade him 
do certain things, is absurd. That he was main- 
tained and supported in a large degree by New 

addressed to Mr. Corcoran a letter of thanks which I read at Mr. 
Corcoran's request.' This version is substantially correct. The 
morning' of March 8 Mr. Corcoran inclosed with a letter of con- 
gratuhition some notes of Mr. Webster's amounting to some six 
thousand dollars. Reflecting that this was not a very solid trib- 
ute, he opened his letter and put in a check for a thousand dol- 
lars, and sent the notes and the check to Mr. Webster, who wrote 
liim a letter expressing his gratitude, which Mr. Taylne doubtless 
saw, and which is still in existence. I give tlie facta in this way 
because Mr. George T. Curtis, in a newspaper interview, referring 
to an article of mino in the Atlaiitid Monthly^ said, " With regard 
to the story of the ten thousand dollar check, which story Mr. 
Lodge gives us to understand he found in the pages of that very 
credulous writer, Dr. Von Hoist, although I have not looked into 
his volunius to see whether he makes the charge, I have only to 
say that I never heard of such an occurrence before, and that it 
would require the oath of a very credible witness to the fact to 
make me believe it." I may add that I have taken the trouble 
not only to look into Dr. Von Hoist's volumes but to examine the 
whole matter thoroughly. The proof is absolute, my authority 
was Mr. Corcoran himself, and indeed it is not necessary to go be- 
j'oud Mr. Webster's own letter of acknowledgment in search of 
evidence, were there the slightest reason to doubt the substan- 
tial correctness of Mr. Tayloe's statement. The point is a small 
one, but a statement of fact, if questioned, ought always to be 
sustained or withdrawn. 



THE LAST YEARS :U9 

England manufacturers and capitalists cannot 1)0 
questioned; but his attitude toward them was not 
that of servant and dependent. lie seems to have 
recrarded the merchants and bankers of State Street 
very much as a feudal baron regaided his pea- 
santry. It was their privilege and duty to sup- 
port him, and he repaid them with an occasional 
magnificent compliment. The result was that he 
lived in debt and died insolvent, and this was not 
the position which such a man as Daniel Webster 
should have occupied. 

He showed the same indifference to the source 
of supplies of money in other ways. He took a 
fee from Wheelock, and then deserted him. He 
came down to Salem to prosecute a nuirderer, and 
the opposing counsel objected tliat he was brought 
there to hurry the jury beyond the law and the 
evidence, and it was even murmured audibly In 
the court-room that he had a fee from the relatives 
of the murdered man in his pocket. A fee of that 
sort he certainly received either then or afterwards. 
Every ugly public attack that was made upt)n liim 
related to money, and it is painful that the bio- 
grapher of such a man as Webster should be com- 
pelled to give many pages to show tliat liis hero 
was not in the pay of manufacturers, ami ilid not 
receive a bribe in carrying out the provisions of 
the treaty of Guadaloui)e-IIidalgo. The refuta- 
tion may be perfectly successfid, but there ouglit 
to have been no need of it. The reputation of a 
man like Mr. Webster in money matters should 



350 DANIEL WEBSTER 

have been so far above siis])ieIon that no one would 
have dreamed of attacking it. Debts and sub- 
scriptions bred the idea that there might be worse 
behind, and althougli there is no reason to believe 
tliat such was the case, these tilings are of them- 
selves dei)lorable enough. 

When Mr. Webster failed it was a moral fail- 
ure. His moral character was not- equal to his in- 
tellectual force. All the errors he ever committed, 
whether in public or in private life, in political 
action or in regard to money obligations, came 
from moral weakness. He was deficient in that 
intensity of conviction which carries men beyond 
and above all triumphs of statesmanship, and 
makes them the embodiment of the great moral 
forces which move the world. If Mr. AVebster's 
moral ])ower had ecpuded his intellectual greatness, 
he would have had no rival in our history. But 
this combination and balance are so rare that tliey 
are hardly to l)e found in perfection among the 
sons of men. The very fact of his greatness made 
his failings all the more dangerous and unfortu- 
nate. To be blinded by the splendor of his fame 
and the lustre of his achievements and prate about 
the sin of belittling a great man is the falsest phi- 
losophy and the meanest cant. The only thing 
worth having, in history as in life, is truth; and 
we do wrong to our past, to ourselves, and to our 
posterity if we do not strive to render sim])le 
justice always. We can forgive the errors and 
sorrow for the faults of our great ones gone; we 



THE LAST YEARS .r.i 

oannot afford to liiJe or foi-vt tlicir sliortcoininrrs. 
But after all has been said, the (iuestion of most 
interest is, what Mr. Wehster represented, wliat 
he effected, and wliat he means in our liistorv. 
The answer is simple. He stands to-day as the 
preeminent ehami)ion and exponent of natiouality. 
He said onee, '^ There are no Alleghanies iu my 
politics," and he spoke the exact trutli. Mr. 
Webster was thoroughly national. There is no 
taint of sectionalism or narrow local i)rejudice 
about him. He towers up as an American, a 
citizen of the United States in the fullest sense of 
the word. He did not invent the Uniim, or dis- 
cover the doctrine of nationality. But he found 
the great fact and the great principle ready to his 
hand, and he lifted them uj), and preached the 
gospel of nationality throughout the length and 
breadth of the land. In his fidelity to this cause 
he never wavered nor faltered. From the tirst 
burst of boyish oratory to the sleepless niglits 
at iVIarshfield, when, waiting for death, he looked 
through the window at the light which sliowi'd 
him the national Hag fluttering from its staff, liis 
first thought was of a united country. To his 
large nature the Union ajipealed ])owerfullv by 
the mere sense of magnitude wliich it convevrd. 
The vision of future empire, the dream of the <h'- 
stiny of an unbroken union touclu'd an<l l.indlrd 
his imagination. He could liardly speak in j)ublic 
without an allusion to the grandeur of American 
nationality, and a fervent aj^peal to keej) it sacred 



352 DANIEL WEBSTER 

and intact. For fifty years, with reiteration ever 
more frequent, sometimes with rich elaboration, 
sometimes with brief and simple allusion, he poured 
this message into the ears of a listening people. 
His words passed into text-books, and became the 
first declamations of schoolboys. They were in 
every one's mouth. They sank into the hearts of 
the people, and became unconsciously a part of 
their life and daily thoughts. When the hour 
came, it was love for the Union and the sentiment 
of nationality which nerved the arm of the North, 
and sustained her courage. Tliat love had been 
fostered, and that sentiment had been strengthened 
and vivified by the life and words of Webster. 
No one had done so much, or had so large a share 
in this momentous task. Mere lies the debt which 
the American people owe to Webster, and here is 
his meaning and imjiortance in his own time and 
to us to-day. His career, his intellect, and his 
achievements are inseparably connected with the 
maintenance of a great empire and the fortunes 
of a great people. So long as English oratory is 
read or studied, so long will his speeches stand 
high in literature. So long as the Union of these 
States endures, or holds a place in history, will 
the name of Daniel Webster be honored and re- 
membered, and his stately eloquence find an echo 
in the hearts of his comitrymen. 



INDEX 



INDEX 



Aberdeen, Lord, succeeds Palmer- 
ston, liis peaceful foreign policy, 
245, 24G ; iuttueuced by Webster in 
Oregon boundary controversy, 259 ; 
proposes forty-ninth parallel, 259. 
Abolitionists, petition for abolition in 
District of Columbia, 273; logical, 
but impracticable in l.'~50, 307 ; de- 
nounce Webster's 7tli of March 
speech, 315 ; confoundt^d by Web- 
ster with Free Soilers, 31S. 
Adams, John, Hamilton's letter to, 
23 ; in Massachusetts Constitutional 
Convention, 108; his fitness to 
judge Webster's oratorical ability, 
119 : praises Webster's Plymouth 
oration, 119, 120; Webster's eulogy 
on, 122, 14C ; his imaginary speech, 
122, 123, 148. 
Adams, John Quincy, his prominence 
rivaled by Webster's, 125; disap- 
proves of proposed mission of Ev- 
erett to Greece, 131 ; on Webster's 
speech against tariff of 1824, 132 ; 
elected President, 132, 144 ; repre- 
sents conservative element of Re- 
publican party, 135; his adminis- 
tration supported by Webster, 130 ; 
advocates Panama Congress, 130; 
threatens to coerce Georgia in 
Creek affair, 137 ; Federalist ha- 
tred of, in Massachusetts, 140, 141 ; 
lack of friendly relations with Web- 
ster, 141 ; accuses Wubster of try- 
ing to screen Crawford from expo- 
sure, 142, 143 ; Webster obliged by 
New Ktiglaud sentiment t<> sup- 
port, 143, 144; promises Webster 
not to proscribe Fi^deralists, 144 ; 
tries to conciliate Webstf-r througii 
Clay, 144 ; on Webster's desire for 
Eugli.sh mission, 144 ; increasingly 



friendly relations with Web.-ter, 
145 ; believes Webster morally un- 
sound, 145; thought by Webst.r to 
fail in supporting him, 14.">; urges 
election of Lincoln as Massachu- 
setts senator, 145 ; growiug cool- 
ness of Webster toward, 140; de- 
scribes effect of Webster's Adams 
and Jefferson oration, 14S ; Hayne's 
taunt on, ISO ; cliara<teristi.s of 
his oratory. 195; on effect of Web- 
ster's reply to Hayne, 201 ; his 
career as Secretary of State com- 
pared with Webster's, 254; hla 
struggle for right of petition, 270 ; 
on Southern policy of Massachu- 
setts congressmen, 278. 
Ames, Fisher, his reputation due to a 

single speech, 195. 
Anti-Masons, defeat Whig party, 202, 

219. 
Appleton, Mrs., death of, 204. 
Ashburton, Lord, his mission to 
United States, 240 ; negotiates witli 
Webster, 240-249 ; agrees upon con- 
cessions with Webster, 247 ; p«'r- 
suaded to aduut indemnity to 
Maine into treaty, 248; letter of 
Webster to, on impreesment, 249 , 
denounced ni Parliament, "iVJ. 
Ashburton treaty, causes lor. 240, 
negotiations preceding, 240-240 ; m»« 
Diplomatic Hist.>ry . ratified in 
Senate, 250 ; altackeil in r.»rli.\- 
nient, 252, 253 ; atUoked by Caw. 

2.53. 

Ashnum. George, defends W. b.ster 
against Inuersoll. 202. 

Atkinson, K.lward. on Clay's tariff 
speech of lS-.'4. l.VJ. 101. 

Austria, relations with, during Fill- 
more's administration. 324-32G. 



350 



INDEX 



BACoritT. M. DE, describes presenta- 
tion of diplomatic corps to Harri- 
son, 239, 240. 
Bank of United States, division of 
parties concerning, (iO ; attempts to 
cliartcr, (>0, dj ; vetoed by Madison, 
C)'2 ; renewed debate upon, 1>;J ; nio<l- 
ified by Webster's influence, (A ; 
chartered, G4 ; its liistory, -'(G ; 
proposal to recharter, 203; vetoed 
by Ja<;kson, 204 ; attack of Jackson 
npon, 220; removal of deposits, 
220 ; stru^'gle over in Senate, 221- 
2'i4; bills for, vetoed by Tyler, 
244. 
Bartlett, Ichabod, counsel for Wood- 
ward against Dartmouth trustees, 
77, 78 ; liis shrewdness, 77 ; angers 
W'fibster, 77. 
Bell, John, remark to Webster be- 
fore his reply to Hayne, 174. 
Bellamy, Dr. Joseph, religious con- 
troversy with Wheelock, 73. 
Bennington, battle of, 7. 
Benson, Egbert, in Congress in 1813, 

47. 
Benton, Thomas H., in Democratic j 
party, ]4(i ; praises Webster's atti- 
tude on nullification, 214 ; blames | 
Webster for not abandoning the I 
Whigs and joining Ja<;k8on, 214, | 
215 ; offers expunging resolutions, j 
226, 228 ; condemns Ashburton 
treaty, 2r>0 ; favors separate treat- 
ment of questions in 1850, 303. 
Berrien, John M., his resolution 
against acquiring territory in Mex- 
ican war, 283. 
Bocanegra, M. de, censured by Web- 
ster, 253. 
Boston, society in, 28 ; bar of, 29. 

Bosworth, , anecdote of Webster's 

appreciation of his keenness in 
Rhode Island case, 102, 103. 
Brougham, Lord, compared with Web- 
ster, 123, 182. 
Brown, Rev. Francis, appointed to 
succeed Wheelock as president of 
Dartmouth College, 70 ; refuses to 
obey new trustees, 77 ; letter to 
Webster on effect of his argument, 
01. 
Buchanan, James, taunts Clay with 



244 
in 



condemns 
Ashburton 



Tyler's bank veto, 
Webster's coui'se 
treaty, 250. 

Bulwer, Sir Henry, his opinion of 
Webster, 327. 

Bunker Hill, orations of Webster at, 
120, 121, 124. 

Burke, Edmund, compared by John 
Adams to Webster, 120 ; discussion 
of his oratory, 181 ; his descrip- 
tion of the descent of Hyder Ali, 
193, 194 ; points of superiority 
and inferiority to Webster, 197, 
199. 

Byng, Admiral, 9. 

Calhoun, John C, in Congress in 
1813, 47 ; chairman of Committee 
on Foreign Relations, 48 ; defends 
embargo while moving its repeal, 
52 ; stung by Webster's retorts, 
52 ; announces retention of pro- 
tective duties, 53, 153; inferior in 
debate to Webster through dry- 
ness, 55, 5<"> ; begs Webster, with 
tears, to allow establishment of a 
bank, 01 ; introduces resolution 
that reveiuie be collected in lawful 
money, G4 ; introduces internal im- 
provement bill, GO ; entertained by 
Webster in Boston, 125, 126; mis- 
leads Webster in matter of Grecian 
commissionership, 130, 131 ; fa- 
vored at first by Weljster for pre- 
sidency, 140 ; later abandoned by 
him, 140 ; drifts away from Web- 
ster, 146; author of protection as 
a system, Kio ; writes nullification 
exposition, 167 ; presides, as Vice- 
President, over debate of Webster 
and Hayne, 168; argues that nullifi- 
cation is constitutional, 170, 171 ; 
character of his reasoning, 172 ; 
liis oratory inferior to Webster's, 
195 ; resigns vice-presidency in or- 
der to defend nullification in Sen- 
ate, 207 ; alarmed at Force Bill 
and Jackson's threats, 209 ; agrees 
with Clay upon compromise tariff, 
209 ; defends nullification in debate 
on Force Bill, 210; his argument 
superior to Webster's, 210, 211 ; 
glad to accept compromise, 213 ; 



INDEX 



367 



hoUow-ness of hie alliance with 
Clay, 216 ; his opinion of the 
French trouble under Jackson, 224 ; 
hifl amendment to sub-treasury bill, 
230; his part in annexation of 
Texas, 256 ; moves that abolition 
petitions be not received, 273 ; in- 
troduces bill to exclude anti-slavery 
publications from mails, 274 ; his 
resolutions on slavery, 276, 277 ; 
introduces resolutions on Enter- 
prise case, 279 ; opposes Webster's 
letter in Creole case, 279 ; on peti- 
tion of New Mexicans for exclu- 
sion of slavery, 290; debates with 
Webster the extension of Constitu- 
tion to territories, 290 ; compli- 
mented by Webster in 7th of March 
speech, 316. 
California, adopts Constitution pro- 
hibiting slavery, 290 ; question of 
its admission, 291. 
Canada, invasion of, condemned by 
Webster, 45, 51 ; rebellion in, 241 ; 
the Caroline case, 241 ; settled in 
Ashburton treaty, 249. 
Capitol, Webster's speech on addition 

to, 134, 320. 
Carlyle, Thomas, describes Webster, 

188, 189. 
Cass, Lewis, protests against Ashbur- 
ton treaty, 253 ; correspondence of 
Webster with, 253 ; speech of Web- 
ster against, 267. 
Chamberlain, Mellen, on Webster's 

eloquence, 198 n. 
Chatham, Lord, his oratory com- 
pared to Webster's, 181, 196, 199. 
Cheves, Langdon, in Congress in 1813, 

47. 
China, mission to, established by Web- 
ster, 254. 
Choate, Rufus, superior to Webster as 
jury lawyer, 196 ; inferior in Sen- 
ate, 196, 197 ; succeeded in Senate 
by Webster, 256; leads Webster's 
supporters in Whig Convention, 
329. 
Cicero, compared with Webster, 109. 
Clay, Henry, speaker of House in 1813, 
47; peace commissioner, 65 ; returns 
to Congress, 62 ; places Webster at 
head of Judiciary Committee, 127 , 



supports Webster's resolutions of 
sympathy with Greece, 130 ; advo- 
cates tariff of 1824 as "the Amer- 
ican system," 131, 159; In conser- 
vative wing of Republican party, 
135; advocates Panama CongreRP, 
130; friendly rehition.s witii W«b- 
ster, 141 ; remark of Ad.ims to, on 
Webster, 144 ; his oratory inferior 
to Webster's, 105; oppoaitiun of 
Webster to his nomination m 18.32, 
202; nominated, 202; defeated \<y 
anti-Masons, 202 ; introduces tariff 
of 1832, 206 ; his proposal for a tariff 
compromise disapproved by Weo- 
ster, 208 ; agrees with Calhoun on 
compromise, 209 ; his speech for 
tariff, 210 ; succeeds in carrying 
compromise, 213 ; saves protection, 
213; hollowness of his alliance with 
Calhoun, 216; might have been 
forced by Webster to join liiui. 2ir., 
217 ; thinks he defeated Webeter in 
debate on tariff, 217 ; his national- 
ist feeling involves constant yield- 
ing to South, 217 ; his view pre- 
vails with Wliiga and Webster, 217, 
218; not a candidate in 1836,218; 
joined by Webster in opposition to 
Jackson, 220 ; introduces resolu- 
tions condemning Jackson, 221 ; 
leads Senate to reject Jackson's 
recommendation of reprisals on 
Trance, 224 ; prevents Wel^eter's 
nomination in 1839, 231 ; declines 
cabinet office under Harrison, 234 ; 
denounces Tyler for bank vetoes, 
244 ; movement for his candidacy 
in 1844, 2.'.1, 255; supported by 
Webster, 255; defeated on Texas 
issue, 255 ; candidate for nomina- 
tion in 1848, 265 ; opposed by Tay- 
lor, 265, 260 ; defeated for nomina- 
tion, 266 ; introduces resolutionn on 
slavery, 277 ; Webster's relations 
with in 1843, 280. 281 ; introdacea 
Compromise of 1H50, '.^1, 2'.>-.' : ap- 
proved by W.4)8t.'r, 29'-' ; bin policy 
leads to civil war by enoonraKinR 
South, 302; his coiuust<«nry. SiH".; 
no longer a raudldat*» in iN.'--. 3-2H ; 
his leaderslup compared to Web- 
ster's, 345. 



358 



INDEX 



Clayton, John M., secretary of state, 
replies to Hiilsemann, 325. 

Claytijn-Biilwer treaty, correspond- 
ence of Webster concerning, 327. 

Clingman, Thomas L., on possibility 
of olavery in California, 311. 

Clinton, George, his opinion of Con- 
stitution in 1788, 172. 

Compromise of 1850, its features, 291, 
21t2 ; introduced, 292 ; supported in 
"Webster's 7th of March speech, 
29-2 If . ; a cause of civil war, 301, 
302 ; not necessary to prevent dis- 
union, 302-305 ; a concession to 
South in essence, 306 ; sustained in 
North through Webster's influence, 
315 ; its subsequent failure, 315, 316 ; 
efforts of Webster for, 318. 

Compromises, tlieir failure in history 
of United States, 300-302. 

Constitution, and embargo. 43 ; in re- 
lation to conscription, 59 ; in Dart- 
mouth College case, 78-80, 93 ; in 
Gibbons v. Ogden, 90 ; in Ogden 
V. Saunders, 97 ; Rhode Island case, 
101 ; in relation to tariff, 155, 156, 
IGG ; in relation to nullification, 
170-172 ; held by Webster not to be 
a compact but a national instru- 
ment, 171, 172, 210; his view of, 
unhistorical, 172, 173, 211, 212; 
changed view of in 1830, 173; its 
status in 1830 defined by Webster, 
174, 175 ; in relation to bank, 203 ; 
Webster's speech on, in 1S33, 210 ; 
in relation to power of executive to 
remove from office, 225, 226 ; to 
volunteer bill in Mexican war, 263 ; 
slavery under, 272 ; annexation of 
Texas, 282 ; question of its exten- 
sion over territories, 290. 

Corcoran, William W., his gift to 
Webster, 347 n. 

Crawford, William H., charges of 
Edwards against, 132, 142 ; sup- 
ported by Webster for presidency, 
141, 142; hostility of cabinet to, 
142 ; efforts of Webster to protect 
in investigation, 143 ; tries to gain 
aid of Federalists, 143. 

Creeks, oppressed by Georgia, 137. 

Creole case, 247 ; complicates bound- 
ary negotiations, 247, 279 ; failure 



of Webster to gain satisfaction in, 
248, 249 ; causes extradition clause 
in Ashburton treaty, 248. 

Crimes Act, prepared by Webster and 
Story, 133, 134 ; carried through 
Congress, 134. 

Crittenden. John J., letter of Letcher 
to, on Webster and Clay, 219 ; let- 
ter of Morehead to, on Webster, 
317. 

Cuba, Lopez's invasion of, 327. 

Curtis, George T., his "Life of Web- 
ster" quoted. In., 92 n., 96, 102, 
112, 210, 228, 265, 294, 303, 305, 319, 
329 n., 348 n. 

Gushing, Caleb, accepts mission to 
China, 254 ; remarks of Adams on, 
278. 

Dartmouth College, studies of Web- 
ster at, 12-23 ; prominence of 
Webster in, a.s student, 16, 18 ; de- 
fended by Webster in Dartmouth 
College case, 71-96 ; founded, pre- 
sidencies of the Wheelocks, 73 ; 
quarrel for control of, 73 ; a Feder- 
alist and Congregational strong- 
hold, 74 ; rupture between presi- 
dent of and trustees, 74 ; removal 
of president by trustees, 76 ; ques- 
tion enters politics, 76 ; charter of, 
reorganized by New Hampshire, 
76 ; struggle between old and new 
boards of trustees, 77 ; suit brought 
for against secretary, 77 ; see Dart- 
mouth College case, 71-96 ; tribute 
of Webster to, in his plea before 
Supreme Court, 85, 87, 88 ; party 
pressure brought to aid of, 89, 90. 

Dartmouth College case, 71-96 ; state- 
ment of facts, 72-77 ; arguments in, 
before New Hampshire court, 77- 
81 ; points at issue in, 78-81 ; argu- 
ment in United States Supreme 
Court, 80, 81-88 ; attitude of judges 
toward, 84-86 ; introduction of pol- 
itics into by Webster, 85, 86 ; at- 
tempts of Pinkuey to reargue, 92- 
94 ; decision of court, 93, 94 ; erro- 
neous popular idea of, 94 ; how won 
by Webster, 95. 

Davis, Daniel, solicitor-general of 
Massachusetts, 29. 



INDEX 



359 



Democratic party, beginning in Ad 
ams's administratiou, 135 ; opposes 
Panama Congress, 13G ; over- 
whelmed in 1840, 233 ; elects Polk, • 
25G ; claims all of Oregon, 258 ; does 
not really wish war, 259, 200 ; its | 
status in liS50, 307 ; supported by 
Webster in 1S52, 331. 
Demosthenes, held by Lieber to be 
inferior to Webster, 182 ; his style 
compared to Webster's, 182, 199. 
Denison, John Evelyn, travels in j 
America, 147 ; friendship with Web- 
ster, 147. 
Derby, Earl of, travels in America, 

147. 
Dexter, Samuel, leader of Boston bar, 
29 ; Webster's opinion of, 29 ; 
pleads iu New Hampshire courts, 
3;'). 
Dickinson, Daniel S., attacks Web- 
ster for course in McLeod case, 
2G0 ; denounced by Webster, 2G1 . 
Diplomatic history : mission of Mc- 
Lane to England, Van Buren's in- 
structions, 205: boundary questionat 
issue witli England, 240 ; difficulties 
with over McLeod, 241-24G; Web- 
ster's negotiations with Ashburton, 
246-249; other events under Webster, 
253, 254 ; Creole case, 24G, 248, 249 ; 
complicates boundary negotiations, 
247 ; difficulties caused by attitude 
of Maine, 247 ; agreement of Ash- 
burton and Webster, 247, 24S; 
agreement of States to accept in- 
demnity, 248 ; " cruising conven- 
tion," 248; Hiilsemann letter, 324- 
32G ; negotiations of Webster with 
England over Nicaragua, 327 ; with 
Mexico, 327 ; with Spain, 327 ; 
other matters, 328. 
Disraeli, Benjamin, his opinion on 

free trade, 164. 
District of Columbia, petitions for 
abolition iu, 273 ; debate on, in Sen- 
ate, 273 ; Calhoun's and Clay's re- 
solutions on, 276, 277. 
Disunion, threatened in New Eng- 
land, 46; threatened in 1849-1850, 
291 ; not really probable, 304-305. 
Dorr's Rebellion, 61. 
Douglas, Stephen A., moves exten- 



sion of Missouri Compromiae to 
Oregon, 28G. 

Durfree, , killed in Caroline af- 
fair, 241. 

Duval, Judge Gabriel, against Webnter 
in Dartmouth Cf)UpRf case, 85 ; dit*- 
sents from MarshaU's dccisioii, 03. 

Eastman, Abioait,, mother of Daniel 
Webster, 8; weeps over liis frailty 
in infancy, 8, 9 ; her self-sacritice, 
24. 
Edwards, Ninian, brings chnrges 
against Crawford, 132, 142 ; endea- 
vors to break down his presidential 
candidacy, 142 ; favored by cabinet 
against Crawford, 142. 

Embargo, Webster"b pamphlet ngainst, 
43 ; its repeal n.oved by Calhoun, 
52 ; attacked by Webster, 52, 53. 

England, visit of Webster to, 230, 
231; boundary troubles with, 240; 
difficulties with over Canadian re- 
bellion and McLeod case, 241, 242 ; 
avows Caroline case necessary, 241 ; 
demands release of McLeod, 242 ; 
new and conciliatory ministry in, 
245, 246; rejects offer of forty- 
ninth parallel as Oregon boundary, 
258; danger of war with, 258; in- 
fluenced by Webster to off^er forty- 
ninth parallel, 259 ; negotiations o( 
Webster with about Nicaragua, 327 ; 
other negotiations, 3"28. 

Enterprise case, 278, 279 ; Calhoun's 
' resolutions on, 279. 

Era of Good Eeeling, characteristics 
of, 126, 135, 141. 

Erskine. Lord, his oratory, 1^1 ; supo- 
riorto Webster as a jury lawyer, \'M'>. 

Everett, Edward, his appointment .is 
commissioner to Greece desired by 
Webster, 130 ; disapproved by .\d- 
ams, 131 ; minister to England, 
246 ; declines mission to China, 2.'>4. 

Executive, powers of, deb.ite upon, 
223, 224. 

Exeter .\o.idcmy, studies of Wclister 
at, 11, 12. 

FErF.nAi.i!^T PARTT. Welwtrr a mem- 
ber of, 41,41". , cliaracteroi New i'.uf- 
land Federalism, 41, •*2 . oppoacs 



360 



INDEX 



war of 1812, 4.'>; favors navy, 50; 
differences of Webster from, 56 ; 
riglit in opposing war of 1812, 57, 
58 ; bitterness of, 58, 59 ; holds con- 
scription unconstitutional, 59 ; fa- 
vors a bank in 1814, G2 ; controls 
New Harapsliire, 73 ; controls Dart- 
mouth College, 74 ; decays after 
1820, 125; its members act to- 
gether as a faction, 12G ; its support 
Bouglit by Republican factions, 127 ; 
hates Adams for his abandonment, 
141 ; its support asked by Crawford, 
143; recognition of, promised by 
Adams, 144 ; opposes tariff and pro- 
tection, 153. 

Ferdinand, Prince, 9. 

Fillmore, Millard, appoints Webster 
secretary of state, 324; supported 
by Southern Whigs in convention, 
329; his delegates expected by 
Webster to vote for him, 329, 330 ; 
reasons why preferred by South to 
Webster, 330 ; dissuades Webster 
from resigning, 334. 

Fletcher, Grace, marries Webster, 40 ; 
her character, 40, 150 ; dies, 150. 

Foote, Henry 8., moves reference of 
slavery matters to a select commit- 
tee, 292. 

Foote, Samuel A., introduces resolu- 
tion on sales of western lands, 1C8. 

Force Dill, asked for by Jackson, 208 ; 
introduced into Congress, 209 ; op- 
position of South to, 209 ; supported 
by Webster, 209; debate on, 210- 
213 ; passed, 213. 

Forsyth, John, in Congress in 1813, 
47 ; denounces Adams's message on 
Georgia, 137 ; Webster's reply to, 
138. 

Fox, Charles James, hia oratory, 181 ; 
says a good speech never reads 
well, 184 ; compared with Webster, 
1%,*40. 

Fox, Henry 8., reads address of diplo- 
matic corps to Harrison, 239 ; de- 
mauds release of McLeod, 242 ; 
reports Webster's offer in boundary 
question to government, 246. 

France, policy of Madison towards, 
denounced by Webster, 46 ; at- 
tacked by Webster in Congress, 48, 



52 ; neglects to pay debts, 224 ; 
threatened by Jackson with war, 
224 ; war with, prevented by Clay 
and Webster, 224, 227. 

Free Soil Party, refusal of Webster 
to join, 266, 287 ; illogical, but prac- 
tical, 307 ; relations of Webster 
with leaders of, 313 ; damaged by 
7th of March speech, 315 ; con- 
demned by Webster, 318. 

Free trade, Webster's opinions, 155, 
lf.0, 1G2, H'A. 

Fugitive Slave Law, refusal of North 
to obey, condemned by Webster, 
294, 297, 298 ; condemned by moral 
sentiment of North, 278, 298. 

Fulton, Robert, in case of Gibbons v. 
Ogden, 96. 

Furness, William H., letter of Web- 
ster to, on slavery, 305. 

Gage, Genebal, 9. 

Gaston, William, in Congress in 1813, 
47. 

Georgia, oppresses Creeks in violation 
of treaties, 137 ; threatened by Ad- 
ams, 137 ; its representatives de- 
nounce Webster, 137 ; defied by 
Webster, 138. 

Germaine, Lord George, 9. 

Gibbons v. Ogden, Webster's argu- 
ment in, 96, 97. 

Giddings, Joshua R., on Webster's 
subservience to South, 278 ; on 
Webster's emendation of 7th of 
March speech, 294 ; led by Web- 
ster to expect an anti-slavery speech 
on the 7th of March, 313, 314. 

Gilman, John T., Federalist candidate 
for governor of New Hampshire, 
42. 

Girard, Stephen, attempt to break his 
will, 98. 

Girard Will case, argument of Web- 
ster in, 98-101. 

Goodrich, Samuel G., describes Web- 
ster's peroration in Dartmouth Col- 
lege case, 87. 

Gore, Christopher, accepts Webster 
as clerk, 27 ; bis character and 
opinions, 28 ; defeated for governor 
of Massachusetts, 28 ; value of his 
influence on Webster, 28, 29; dis- 



INDEX 



361 



Buades Webster from accepting a 
clerkship, 30 ; moves Webster's ad- 
misaiou to the bar, 31. 

Greece, revolts, 128 ; proposal of 
Webster and Clay to send com- 
missioners to, 128-130 ; Webster's 
speech on, 129, 130 ; Clay's speech, 
130 ; project defeated by Monroe 
and Adams, 130, 131. 

Grosvenor, Thomas P., in Congress in 
1813,47. 

Grundy, Felix, in Congress in 1813, 
47. 

Hamilton, Alkxakdeb, his letter to 
Adams in 1800 criticised by Web- 
ster, 23 ; his constitutional argu- 
ments compared with Webster's, 
97 ; his advocacy of protection, 153 ; 
his opposition to Virginia and Ken- 
tucky resolutions, 172 ; hia oratori- 
cal fame rests on tradition, 195 ; his 
financial ability compared to Web- 
ster's, 222; Webster's admiration 
of and compliment to, 339. 
Hanson, Alexander C, in Congress in 

1813, 47. 
Harrison, William Henry, preferred 
by western Whigs to Webster in 
1836, 219 ; nominated in 1839, 231 ; 
supported by Webster, 231, 232; 
elected, 233 ; invites Webster and 
Clay into cabinet, 234 ; his charac- 
ter, 237, 238; anecdote of his in- 
augural speech, 238 ; presentation 
of diplomatic corps to, described, 
239, 240 ; dies, 243. 
Hartford Convention, disapproved of 
by Webster, 56, 57 ; its relation to 
Calhoun's nullification, 170, 172. 
Harvard College. See Dartmouth 

College case, 79. 
Harvey, Peter, tells fictitious anecdote 
of Webster and Pinkney, 92 n. ; let- 
ter of Webster to, on secession, 304 ; 
on 7th of March speech, 320. 
Hayne, Robert Y., accuses New Eng- 
land of trying to check growth of 
West, H;8 ; Webster's reply to, UW ; 
renews attack upon New England 
and Webster, 169 ; expounds doctrine 
of nullification, 169; Webster's fa- 
mous reply to, 169 £f. ; nature of his 



speech, 179; taunts the " inimlered 
coalition" of Adama and Calhoun, 
180 ; leads protest against UuifT of 
1832, 206 ; refers to slavery, 271. 

Henry, Patrick, his oratory, 181 ; hia 
fame rests on tradition only, 195. 

Hoar, Samuel, Webster's rt- ffrturs to 
his South Carolina treatment, in 
7th of March speech, 294. 

Holmes, John, in Dartmouth College 
case, 81, 89. 

Holy Alliance, denounced by Webater, 
129. 

Hopkinson, Joseph, in Dartmonth 
College case, 81 ; his argument, 82. 

House of Representatives, able mem- 
bership of, in 1813, 47, 48 ; debates 
and paj^ses Webster's resolutions on 
repeal of French decrees, 48, 49 ; 
leadership of Webster in, 56 ; de- 
feats conscription, 60 ; debate in, 
over a bank, 60, 62 ; brilliant mem- 
bership of, in 1815, 62 ; debates and 
passes Bank Bill, 63, 64 ; debates 
proposals for collecting revenue in 
government money, 64, 65 ; passes 
Internal Improvement Bill, 06 ; in- 
dependent position of Webster in, 
127 ; debates resolution to send com- 
missioner to Greece, 128-130; de- 
bates tariff of 1824, 131 ; deb*te« 
powers of Supreme Court, 132; In- 
vestigates charges against Craw- 
ford, 132, 142, 143; electa Adama 
President, 132, 143, 144 ; debate on 
internal improvements, 133 ; paaaea 
bill to increase Supreme Court, 134 ; 
struggle in, over jieuding ©oramis- 
sioner to Panama Congress, KV., 
137; debate in, on Georgia and the 
Creeks, 137, 138; adopta CUy'a 
Compromise Tariff Bill, 213 ; attark 
in, upon Webster's integrity. 'JCO, 
261 ; rejects Oregon Organiiation 
Bill, 286. 

Hulsemann, , protaata againat 

sending of commis.nioner to Hun- 
gary, 3-5 ; l«av.'s c.iiuitry in angt-r 
alter Webster's Ko»«utli i»j»«««m li, 

326. 
Hungary, agent a<>nt to. by TayWir, 
3*24 ; popular enthuaiaaui for, 3£i» 

320. 



362 



INDEX 



Hunter, 



reply of Webster 



through, to Hiilsemann, 320. 

Impeessment, letter of Webster to 
Ashburton ou, 249. 

Indians, warfare of Puritans with in 
seventeenth and eighteenth centu- 
ries, 2, 3. 

Ingersoll, C. J., in Congress in 1813, 
47; attacks Ashburton treaty, 2C0 ; 
accuses Webster of corrupt use of 
secret service money, 200 ; de- 
nounced by Webster, 2G1 ; intro- 
duces resolutions calling for papers, 
and threatens impeachment, 2G1 ; 
accuses Webster of defalcation, 2G2 ; 
his charges disproved, 262. 

Internal improvements, bill for, ve- 
toed by Madison, G6. 

Jackson, Andrew, leads Democratic 
wing of Republican party, 135 ; im- 
possibility of his support by Web- 
ster, 140 ; introduces spoils system, 
1G7 ; vetoes bank charter, 204 ; liis 
reasons criticised, 204 ; refuted by 
Webster, 204 ; his nullitioation pro- 
clamation, 207 ; threatens nullifiers, 
207, 208 ; asks for autliority to en- 
force laws in South Carolina, 208, 
209 ; his relations with Webster, 
214; impossibility of Benton's view 
of his alliance with Webster, 215 ; his 
incompatibility with Webster, 215 ; 
aims to destroy Bank, 220 ; resolu- 
tions against, in Senate, 221 ; sends 
protest to Senate, 222, 223 ; reply of 
Webster to, 223 ; gains strength 
for the executive through his popu- 
larity, 224; recommends reprisals 
on France, 224 ; eager for war, 224 ; 
his message on loss of Fortification 
Bill, 227 ; administration arraigned 
by Webster in Niblo's Garden, 232, 
274. 

Jefferson, Thomas, his error in wish- 
ing embargo vmlimited, 4.'^ ; Web- 
ster's eulogy ou, 122 ; Webster's 
interview with, 147. 

Johnson, Judge William, efforts of 
Webster to convert, in Dartmouth 
College case, 84 ; efforts to con- 
yince through Kent, 90, 91. 



Kent, James, converted to Federalist 
view of Dartmouth College case, 
90; influences Livingston, 91; let- 
ter of Story to, 99. 

Kentucky, ottended by Supreme Court 
decisions, 132 ; its resolutions ori- 
gin of nullification, 170 ; distrusts 
Webster, 219. 

Kossutli, brought to United States, 
32(; ; enthusiasm for, 326 ; Web- 
ster's speech concerning, 326. 

Letcher, Robert P., on Clay's supe- 
riority to Webster, 219. 

Liberty Party, alarms Webster, 255, 
280 ; defeats Clay, 255. 

Lieber, Dr. Francis, compares De- 
mosthenes to Webster, 182. 

Lincoln, Governor Benjamin, declines 
senatorshin, 139. 

Livingston, Judge Brockholst, effort 
of Webster to convince in Dart- 
mouth College case, 84 ; efforts to 
put pressure on, 90 ; influenced by 
Kent, 90, 91. 

Lopez, invades Cuba, 327. 

Lowndes, William, in Congress in 
1813, 47. 

Macaclat, T. B., contrast with Web- 
ster, 342. 

McDufhe, George, attacks Cumber- 
laud road as sectional, 133; assails 
New England for building up West 
at expense of South, 168. 

MacGregor, , letter of Webster 

to, on Oregon boundary, 259. 

McLane, Louis, Van Buren's instruc- 
tions to, 205, 20G. 

McLeod, Alexander, arrested in New 
York for murder of Durfree in Car- 
oline affair, 241 ; difficulties over, 
241, 242 ; release demanded by Fox, 
242 ; efforts of Webster to secure 
release of, 243 ; release refused by 
New York, !i43 ; acquitted, 246; 
alleged threat of Webster in his 
case, 2G0. 

Madison, James, addressed by Web- 
ster in " Rockingham Memorial," 
46 ; on good terms with Webster, 
59 ; vetoes bank bill, C2 ; vetoes in- 
ternal improvement bill, 66 ; ap* 



INDEX 



3(')3 



proves charter of second Bank, 204 ; 
Webster's .adiuiration for, 339. 
Maine, set off from Mass.iclmsetts, 
107 ; liainpers government in bound- 
ary question, 241 ; instructs com- 
missioners to insist on boundary as 
claimed, 'J4T ; accepts proposal of 
Webster to indemnify in money, 
'24S ; its rights sacrificed, 240. 
Manufactures, considered by Webster 
as undesirable in a country, 154, 
158. 
Marsh.iU, John, not considered su- 
perior to Mason by Webster, 37 ; in 
Dartmouth College case, 80 ; favor- 
able to Webster at outset of case, 
84 ; his Federalist prejudices aroused 
by Webster, 85, 80 ; described by 
Goodrich, 87 ; announces continua- 
tion of case, 89 ; announces decision 
in case, 1)3 ; importance of his doc- 
trine, 93 ; ability compared with 
Webster's, 97, 100 ; his opinion in 
McCuUoch V. Maryland, 203. 
Mason, Jeremiah, his legal ability, 
37 ; describes Webster's first en- 
counter with him, 37, 38 ; Webster's 
high opinion of, 37 ; advises and 
helps Webster, 38 ; on Webster's 
dramatic capabilities, 41 ; influences 
Webster's style, 44 ; his success in 
jury trials influeuces Webster's man- 
ner, 59 ; on side of Dartmoutli trus- 
tees, 74 ; advises trustees to wait, 75 ; 
acts as counsel, 77, 78 ; his brief m 
case, 78 ; attaches slight importance 
to constitutional point, 78 ; his jyrin- 
cipal argument, 79 ; urged by Web- 
ster to hurry on other cases, 80, 81 ; 
declines to go to Wa.shington, 81 ; 
furnishes Webster with arguments, 
82, 83 ; given due credit by Web- 
ster, 83 ; letter of Story to, on Web- 
ster, 113 ; Webster's eulogy on, 124 ; 
urged by Webster for attorney-gen- 
eral, 143 ; attempt to elect him sen- 
ator from New Hampshire, 145. 
Mason, George, his opinion of Consti- 
tution in 1788, 172. 
Mason, J. T., on possibility of slavery 
in California, 311; complimented 
by Webster in 7th of March speech, 
317. 



Maasachusett.s, sends out settler.-* in 
seventeenth century, 1, 2; demo- 
cratic prejudices in, 28 ; constitu- 
tional convention of, 107-114; 
chooses best men without regard to 
party, Iti", lOS ; dtMnocratic and 
conservative elements in, 108 ; elects 
Webster senator, 139, 140 ; nonii- 
nates Webster for President, 218 ; 
dissuades Webster from resigning 
seat in Senate, 229 ; hampers boiuid- 
ary lagotiations, 241. 217; nt first 
approves Webster's remaining in 
Tyler's cabinet, 245 ; agrees to ac- 
cept money indemnity in Ashhur- 
ton treaty, 248 ; formally declares 
Tyler out of party, 251 ; reply of 
Webster to its attempt to force him 
out of cabinet, 251, 252; rei-lecta 
Webster to Senate, 250 ; opposes 
Missouri compromise, 207. 
Meclianics' Institute, Webster's ora- 
tion before, 123. 
Melbourne, Lord, his remark on Mac- 

aulay, 342. 
Mexico, negotiations of Webster with, 

253, 327 : war witli, 2('^. 
Mills, E. H., senator from Masaachu- 

setts, 139. 
Mirabeau, Count, his oratory, 181. 
Missouri Compromise, opposition to, 
in Massachusetts, 207. 21* ; Web- 
ster's memorial against, 2('>8, 209 ; 
its line suggested in 1848, 280; in 
1849, 289. 
Monroe, James, propows con.-H'rii)- 
tion, 00; urged by Webster to viwt 
North, 125. 
Morclinad, Charles S., on acceptabil- 
ity to Soutli of Webster's apiH)inl- 
ment as secretary of 8tat«, 317. 

Nashville Convention, WoUtt'r'n 
opinion of, 294. 

Navy, its use urge.l in war of 1812 by 
Webster, 44, 45, 50, 51. 

New England, early Bettlement of. 1, 
2; Indian warfare in, 2, 3 , cliarac- 
ter of settlers of, 4; bar in, »(t<T 
Revolution, 34, 35; Fodcralmni in, 
41, 45; suffers from cml>«rgo, "13; 
threatens disimion, -ih ; U>ad«>r- 
ship of Webster in, 125; support* 



364 



INDEX 



Adams for presidency, 140, 144 ; 
Btrenfjth of Whig party in, 140; op- 
po8«8 tariff, 153, 157; by 182S 
changes opinions and favors pro- 
tection, 10*2, 163, 1G5; attacked by 
Hayne in Senate, 1C8, 109 ; de- 
fended by Webster, 168 ; its re- 
presentatives alarmed by Hayne's 
attack, 176, 177 ; supports com- 
promise tariff, 218. 
New Hampshire, character of soil of, 

3 ; character of its Puritan settlers, 

4 ; bar of, 34-36 ; kept out of Hart- 
ford Convention by Webster's in- 
fluence, 56 ; controlled by Federal- 
ists, 73 ; Congregational churches 
established in, 73, 74 ; political ex- 
citement in, over Dartmouth Col- 
lege controversy, 74-76 ; legislature 
carried by Republicans, 76 ; reor- 
ganizes college and appoints new 
trustees, 76 ; court of decides against 
college, SI. 

New Mexico, petitions for exclusion 
of slavery, 290. 

New York, arrests McLeod, 241 ; re- 
fuses to release him on Webster's 
request, 242, 243. 

Niagara, visited by Webster, his de- 
scription, 147. 

Nicaragua, relations of England to, 
under Clayton-Bulwer treaty, 327. 

Nichol, , on Webster's humor, 

341. 

Niles, Judge, his struggle with Wheel- 
ock for government of Dartmouth, 
73. 

North, not yet united in 1841, 237; 
attempt of Webster to rouse against 
Texas, 280, 281 ; tries to exclude 
slavery from new territories, 289 ; 
its grievances according to Web- 
ster, 294, 296 ; shocked by Web- 
ster's defense of Fugitive Slave 
Law, 297, 298, 299 ; effect of 7th of 
March speech in, 315 : disappoint- 
ment in, at the speech, 316. 

Noyes, Parker, aids Webster in early 
legal career, 104. 

Nullification, doctrine of, pronounced 
by Calhoun, 167 ; expounded by 
Hayne in Senate, 169 ; its origin, 
170 ; Webster's argument against, 



170, 171, 175; reasons why Calhoun 
tries to make it constitutional, 173, 
174 ; tried by South Carolina, 207 ; 
Jackson's proclamation against, 207; 
argument in favor of, by Calhoun, 
210. 

OoDEN V. Saunders, argument of 
Webster in, 97. 

Ordinance of 1787, Webster's opinion 
of, 272. 

Oregon, negotiations of Webster con- 
cerning, 254, 257 ; occupation of, de- 
manded by Democrats, 258 ; danger 
of war with England for, 258, 259 ; 
compromise agreed on, 259 ; ques- 
tion of its organization, 286 ; speech 
of Webster on, 286 ; organized with 
Wilraot Proviso, 287. 

Otis, Harrison Gray, leader of Boston 
bar, 29. 

Palmerston, Lord, his domineering 
attitude, 242 ; attacks Ashburton 
treaty in Parliament, 252. 

Panama Congress, desire of Adams 
and Clay to send envoy to, 136 ; 
opposed in House by South, 136 ; 
supported by Webster, 136, 137. 

Parker, Judge, in Massachusetts Con- 
stitutional Convention, 108. 

Parsons, Theophilus, chief justice of 
Massachusetts, 29 ; Webster's opin- 
ion of, 29 ; appears in New Hamp- 
shire courts, 35 ; opinion as to Har- 
vard College charter, 79. 

Parton, James, describee Webster, 
189, 190. 

Peake, Thomas, his " Law of Evi- 
dence " condemned by Webster, 36 ; 
vindicated by Plumer, 36. 

Peel, Sir Robert, succeeds Melbourne 
ministry, 245. 

Pickering, Timothy, in Congress in 
1813, 47, 49. 

Pierce, Franklin, Webster advi.ses his 
friends to vote for. 331-333. 

Pinkuey, William, leader of bar in 
America, in fourteenth Congress, 
62 ; retained in Dartmouth College 
case, his legal ability, 91, 92 ; myth- 
ical anecdote of his relations to 
Webster, 92; on bad terms with 



INDEX 



36o 



Wirt, 92; nsks for a roargument, 
93; overruled in attempts to re- 
open, 1)4. 

Piiikney, Riglit Reverend William, 
refutes Harvey's anecdote of Pink- 
ney and Webster, 92. 

Pitkin, Timothy, in Congress in 1813, 
47. 

Plumer, William, his public career, 
35; leader of New Hampshire bar, 
35 ; defeats Webster in early cases, 
155, 30 ; vindicates Peake's " Law of 
Evidence " against Webster, 3(J ; in 
ill-health, 74 ; elected governor, 7C ; 
declares against Dartmouth trustees 
in message, 76. 

Plymouth, Webster's oration at, 114- 
120. 

Polk, James K., enters office, 25G; 
claims whole of Oregon in his mes- 
sage, 258 ; refuses call of House to 
reveal use of secret service money, 
262 ; brings on Mexican war, 203, 
282; urges extension of Missouri 
Compromise line over territories, 
289. 

Portugal, treaty of Webster with, 

253. 
Prescott, Judge, defended by Web- 
ster, 192. 
Puritans, in New Hampshire, their 
characteristics, 4. 

QciNCT, JosiAH, declares in favor of 
secession, 172. 

Randolph, John, in fourteenth Con- 
press, his character, 62 ; challenges 
Webster to a duel, 65 ; in debate on 
Greece, 130. 

Republican party, war faction in, 47 ; 
drops Webster from Committee on 
Foreign Relations, 49 ; divisions in, 
regarding bank policy, 60; in New 
Hampshire, opposes Dartmouth Col- 
lege trustees, 76; carries state le- 
gislature and reorganizes college 
charter, 76 ; adopts Federalist prin- 
ciples, 126; splits into factions, 
126. 

Rhode Island case, argument of Web- 
ster in, 101 ; attitude of govern- 
ment in, directed by Webster, 254. 



Rogers's Rangers, in French and In- 
dian war, 5. 

Root, J. F., his Wilmot Proviso reso- 
lution laid on table, 305. 

Scott, Gen. Winfield, candidat«> in 
Wliig CoMvcutioii of 1H48, 2t'.('. ; bui>- 
ported by Northern Whigs for nom- 
ination, 3'-'9 ; nominated through % 
compromise, 320 ; refusal of Web- 
ster to vote for, 331-333. 
Search, right of, negotiations concern- 
ing, in A.shburton treaty. '-'4S, 2.">3. 
Seaton, Mrs., remark of Webster to, 
on Harrison's inaugural speech. '23«. 
Senate of United States, rejecta bill 
to increase Supreme Court, 135; 
passes bill to relieve Revolutionary 
officers, 152 ; debates tariff of l^2S, 
152 ; debate in, on nullification, 108- 
177 ; rejects Van Buren's nomina- 
tion to English mission, 205; de- 
bate in, on Force Bill, 210; pames 
Force Bill, and Compromise Tariff, 
213; censures Jackson, 221 ; Jack- 
son's protest to, 223 ; debate upon, 
223, 224 ; defeats expunging reso- 
lutions, 22G ; passes expunging re- 
solutions, 228 ; ratifies Ashburton 
treaty, 250 ; ratifies Oregon treaty, 
259 ; defeats resolution calling for 
accounts of secret service money, 
202 ; debates right of petition, 273, 
277 ; defeats no-territory resolu- 
tion, 283; defeats Wilmot Proviso, 
284 ; debates new territories, 289, 
290. 
Seward, W. II., influences Taylor, 

291, 303. 

Slieridan, R. B.. his oratory, 181, 1%. 

Shirley, John M., his volume on 

"Dartmouth College Causes," 72, 

70. 

Silliman, Prof. Benjamin, remark of 

Webster to. on his life, 3;«5. 
Slave trade, "cruising convpntion " 
against, in Ashburton treaty, 24« ; 
Webster's ojuuion of. 'JO;*. '.*70. 
Slavery, cau.se of opposition to Pan- 
ama Congress, 136, 271 ; denounced 
by Webster, 200, 270, 271 ; int*n- 
tion of disturbing disavowed by 
Webster, 271, 272. 



3C6 



INDEX 



Smith, Jeremiah, cliief justice of New 
Hauipsliire, 3.") ; ou aide of trustees 
in Dartmoutli College case, 74, 77, 
78 ; gives slight weight to coustitu- 
tioual point, 7'J ; declines to go to 
\\'ashington, 81 ; furnishes Web- 
ster with argument, 8'J, 8o ; giveu 
credit by Webster, 8'2, 83. 
Smith, Sidney, remark ou Webster's 

appearance, 188. 
South, opposes Panama Congress, 137 ; 
angered at Adams's throat to co- 
erce Georgia, 137 ; overbearing 
manners of, 237 ; Webster's tour in, 
2G3 ; attitude toward abolitionists, 
274 ; opposes organization of Ore- 
gon without slavery, 286 ; threat- 
ens secession in 1830, 291 ; its 
grievances according to Webster, 
293, 294, 296 ; its course in de- 
manding compromises, 300, 301 ; 
misled by compromise of 1850, 301 ; 
gratified by Webster's 7th of March 
speech, 317. 
South Carolina, violently opposes 
tariff of 1828, 167 ; renews opposi- 
tion in 1832, 206; passes nuUifica- 
tiou ordinance, 207 ; replies to 
Jackson's threats, 207 ; gains its 
demands by compromise tariff, 210, 
213. 
Spain, speech of Clay against, 130 ; 

negotiations of Webster with, 327. 
Specie Circular, its effects, 227 ; mo- 
tion to rescind, 227. 
Spoils system, Webster's opinion of, 

167 ; under Harrison, 237. 
States' rights, in nullification, 170. 
Stevenson, Andrew, pugnacious atti- 
tude as minister to J^ngland, 242 ; 
succeeded by Everett, 246. 
Story, Joseph, on new board of Dart- 
moutli trustees, 76 ; necessity of 
convincing, in order to win Dart- 
mouth College case, 84 ; converted 
by Webster's argument, 90 ; his 
opinion in the case, 93 ; his deci- 
sion hi circuit court, 94 ; on Web- 
ster's argument in Girard case, 99 ; 
describes audience in Charles River 
Bridge case, 101, 102 ; his assist- 
ance to Webster, IM, 105 ; publica- 
tion of his correspondence refused 



by Webster, 105; ingratitude of 
Webster toward, 105 ; in Massachu- 
setts Constitutional Convention, 
108 ; argues for property represen- 
tation, 112 ; describes Webster in 
Constitutional Convention, 113, 
114; Webster's eulogy on, 124; 
aids Webster in preparing Crimes 
Act, 134; aids Webster in Judiciary 
Bill, 134 ; describes Webster's en- 
trance into Senate, 151 ; aids Web- 
ster in Ashburton negotiations, 290. 

Sub-treasury, speech of Webster 
against, 230. 

Sullivan, George, leader of New 
Hampshire bar, 35 ; counsel for 
Woodward in Dartmouth case, 77. 

Sullivan, James, leader of Boston bar, 
29 ; Webster's opinion of, 29. 

Supreme Court, practice of Webster 
in, 07 ; trial of Dartmouth College 
case in, 82-89 ; influenced by Fed- 
eralist prejudices, 89, 90, 91 ; de- 
cides for College against State, 93 ; 
defended in House by Webster, 132 ; 
bill to increase, defeated in Con- 
gress, 134, 135. 

Taney, Rooer B., removes deposits 

from bank, 220. 
Tariff of 1814, opposed by Webster, 
153-155; in 1816, opposed by Web- 
ster, 155, 15G; in 1820, opposed by 
Webster at Faneuil Hall, 156; in 
1824, advocated by Clay as " Ameri- 
can system," 159 ; opposed by Web- 
ster, 159-161 ; of 1828, supported by 
Webster, 161-166 ; leads to nullifi- 
cation, 166 tt'. ; reduction in 1832, 
206, 207 ; compromise tariff pro- 
posed by Clay, 208 ; agreed to by 
Calhoun, 209 ; opposed by Webster, 
210 ; passed, 213. 
Taunton, Lord, travels in America, 

147. 
Tayloe, B. Ogle, gives anecdote of 

Webster, 347 n. 
Taylor, General Zachary, movement 
to make him Whig candidate, 265 ; 
call for meeting in favor of, signed 
by Webster's friends, 265 ; used to 
defeat Clay, 265, 266 ; nominated, 
260 ; Webster's speech on, 267, 287; 



INDEX 



nn — 



elected, 2G7 ; reasons for liis nnnii- 
nation, 2S8 ; advises admisbioti of 
California, 201, 'J9'J, 302; couraRe 
and honesty of his policy, 303 ; dies, 
324 ; sends agent to Hungary, 324. 
Tazewell, Littleton W., reply of Web- 
ster to, 151. 
Territories, power of Congress over, 

2C8, 287. 
Texas, gains independence, 22G ; ne- 
gotiations of Webster with Boca- 
negra concerning, 253; annexation 
of, in campaign of 1S44, 255, 281 ; 
annexed by Calhoun and Tyler, 25t), 
281 ; admitted as a State, 282 ; plan 
to divide, 286 ; its boundary dispute 
with New Mexico, 291. 
Thompson, , law studies of Web- 
ster with, 20. 
Ticknor, George, describes effect of 
Webster's Plymouth oration, 114, 
115, 118; his critical ability, 115, 
IIG ; describes enthusiasm over 
Webster's Adams and Jefferson ora- 
tion, 148; letter of Story to, on 
Webster's entrance into Senate, 151. 
Todd, Judge Thomas, against Webster 
in Dartmouth College case, 84 ; ab- 
sent from decision, 93. 
Troup, George M., in Congress in 

1813, 47. 
Tyler, John, succeeds Harrison, 243 ; 
vetoes Bank Bill, 244; denounced 
by Clay, 244 ; driven by attacks of 
Whigs into vetoing second Bank 
Bill, 244; read out of party by 
Whigp, 251 ; his message explained 
by Webster, 253. 

Union, a result of growth, 173 ; 
stronger in 1830 than in 1814 or 
1799, 173 ; defined by Webster, 174. 



Van Burkn, Martin, organizes De- 
mocratic party, 146 ; instructs Mc- 
Lane to abandon pretensions of 
Adams's administration to We.'^t In- 
dian trade, 205 ; denomiced by Web- 
ster in Senate, 205, 206 ; his nomi- 
nation as minister to England re- 
jected, 205; effect of this action 
upon his popularity, 205, 206 ; char- 
acteristioa of his administration, 



230 ; refusal of Webster to support, 
in IMS, 'IS-. 

V'erguiaud, , his oratory, 181. 

Virginia, offended by Supreme Court 
decisions, 132; its re.Hohitionii ori- 
gin of nullification, 170 ; rompli- 
mcnted by Wcbattr in 7th of March 
speech, 317. 

Von Hoist, H. C, on Calhoun's rea- 
soning, 172; on situation in KS-V), 
305 ; anecdote on Wcbsters money 
gifts, 347 n. 

War of 1812, Webster's Bp)eech on, 44- 
46 ; methods of opposing, 45, 46 ; 
"Rockingham Memorial" against, 
threatens secession, 46, 47 ; Web- 
ster's speech on conduct of, r.<\ 51. 
Washington, Judge Burhrod, declares 
Webster's argmii'^nts, aside from 
the contract clause, irrelevant, 8(i; 
favorable to Webster at outset of 
Dartmouth College case, 84 ; de- 
scribed by Goodrich, 87 ; hia opin- 
ion in the case, 93. 
Washington, George, asks Ebenezer 
Webster about feeling in New Hamp- 
shire, 7 ; trusts him at West Point, 
7 ; his opinion of Constitution, 172. 
Washington, city of, outward appear- 
ance of, in 1841, 236, 236; society 
in, 236, 237, 239, 240. 
Webster, Daniel, ancestry, &-8 ; birth, 
8 ; a delicate child, 8, 9 ; unable to 
work, 9; his companion, 9 ; taught 
early to read, 9 ; his education, &- 
23 ; retentive memory, 10 ; anec- 
dotes of school life, 10; early 
shows power of expresHim in n-.-id- 
ing, 10, 11 ; roads everything within 
reacli, his daily life, 11 ; Pttidies at 
Exeter Academy, 11, 12. studies 
with Dr. Wood, 12; overwhelmtxl 
at pr08i>ect of college education. 12 ; 
his preparation for collego, 12, 13; 
characteristics of his boyhood, 14 ; 
anecdote showing indulgence o( 
family toward, 14, I'>. wtu.n devo- 
tion from all f riend.i. 15 ; hi^ aflec- 
tionatt-ness. 15; iitudie* at Dart- 
mouth, 15-23; wins high po^iti'-ti In 
college, 16 ; not a real .itudent or 
scholar, ^f', 17 , wide, not do*p, 



368 



INDEX 



knowledge, 17 ; recognized as re- 
markable by Faculty, 17 ; place in 
student life, 18 ; exhibits eloquence, 

18, 19 ; his personal appearance, its 
effect, Ifl; youthful literary efforts, 

19, 20 ; delivers Fourth of July ora- 
tion in 1800, 'J.0 ; later speaks of it 
with contempt, 20 ; its interest as 
first work, 21 ; imitates style of 
eighteenth century, 21 ; his national- 
istic politics, 22 ; other college ora- 
tions, 22 ; interest in politics, criti- 
cises Hamilton's attack on Adams, 
2*2, 23 ; studies law, 23 ; wishes his 
brother to study at Dartmouth, 23 ; 
asks his father's permission, 23, 24 ; 
teaches school to help his brother, 
24, 25 ; a successful teacher, 25 ; 
love affairs, 25 ; impressiveness of 
his eyes, 25, 26 ; continues reading, 
2G ; delivers Fourth of July ora- 
tion, 26 ; resames study of law, 2C> ; 
begins to feel ambition, 26, 27 ; 
aided by Ezekiel to study in Boston, 
27 ; in Gore's office, 27, 28 ; profits by 
Gore's society, 28, 29 ; sees leaders 
of Massachusetts bar, 29 ; offered 
clerkship in his father's court, 29 ; 
dissuaded by Gore from accepting, 
30 ; admitted to bar at Gore's mo- 
tion, 31 ; studies and practices in 
Boscawen, his success, 31 ; trans- 
fers business to brother and moves 
to Portsmouth, 31 ; his early years 
an honorable and pleasant picture, 
31, 32 ; shows willingness to remain 
in debt, 32 ; his manner in murder 
trial described, 33, 34 ; his col- 
leagues and opponents at bar, 34, 
35 ; held by Plumer to be better 
fitted for politics than law, 35 ; en- 
trapped by Plumer, 36; at first 
overbearing in manner, 36 ; de- 
scribed by Mason, 37, 38 ; infiuenced 
by Mason's friendship and advice, 
38 ; his rapid development in rea- 
soning and eloquence, 39 ; learns 
from contests with Mason, 39 ; 
learns value of simplicity in lan- 
guage, 39; his marriage, 40 ; his 
social popularity, 40, 41 ; bia reli- 
gious views, 41 ; modifies rigid Fed- 
eralism received from father, 41 ; 



adheres to party although not a 
partisan, 42 ; gradually engages in 
politics, 42 ; publishes pamphlet, 
"Appeal to Old Whigs," 42; at- 
tacks administration in Fourth of 
July orations, 43 ; contends that un- 
limited embargo is unconstitutional, 
43 ; address on State of Literature, 
44 ; speech in opposition to w^ar of 
1»12, 44-40; demands a naval war, 
45 ; advocates support of war now 
it is begun, 45; and use of only 
constitutional means to end it, 45, 
46 ; writes address for Rockingham 
convention against war, 46 ; attacks 
Madison and hints at secession, 46, 

47 ; modifies his views to suit occa- 
sion, 47 ; elected to Congress, 47. 

Member of Congress. In Commit- 
tee on Foreign Relations, 48 ; intro- 
duces resolutions calling for infor- 
mation as to repeal of French de- 
crees, 48 ; keenness of his attack, 

48 ; takes little part in business of 
House, 48, 49 ; votes steadily with 
party, 49 ; after vacation dropped 
from Committee on Foreign Rela- 
tions, 49 ; unable to secure debate 
on relations with France, 49 ; de- 
fends Federalists, 50 ; speech against 
bill to encourage enlistments, 50, 
51 ; has gained final style, 50 ; de- 
nounces invasion plans and demands 
naval war, 51 ; attacks Calhoun's 
speech defending removal of em- 
bargo, 52 ; points out destructive 
character of Republican commer- 
cial policy, 53 ; opposes Calhoun's 
retention of protectionist duties, 53, 
54; impression made by his speeches, 
54 ; grows slowly in power, 54 ; his 
speeches the result of years of 
thought, 55 ; his superiority to Cal- 
houn, 55, 56 ; in 1819 admitted to 
be leader of Federalists, 56 ; op- 
poses Hartford Convention, 56 ; acts 
consistently with party in other re- 
spects, 57 ; willing to vote against 
taxes, 57 ; does not favor secession, 
58 ; does not imitate bitterness of 
Federalists, 58 ; on good terms with 
Madison, 59 ; his share in daily de- 
bate, 59; opposes Enlistment Bill, 



INDEX 



3C9 



59 ; Rpeaka apainst Bepiiblican Bank 
Bill, 60 ; shows financial insiRht in 
attacking proposed paper-money 
features, Gl ; asked by Calhoun to 
aid in establishing a paper bank, CI ; 
on able membership of fourteenth 
Congress, C>2 ; late in taking seat, 
63 ; again attacks Bank Bill as un- 
sound, 03 ; predicts speculation, 03 ; 
succeeds in amending bill, G4 ; votes 
against bill on passage, 64 ; later 
supports Bauk warmly, 04 ; offers 
resolution requiring payment of 
government dues iu government 
money, 64 ; attacks use of paper, 04 ; 
secures passage of resolutions and 
resumption of specie payment, 05 ; 
challenged to a duel by Randolph, 
65 ; his reply refusing to fight, 65 ; 
votes for internal improvements, 
66 ; believes in liberal construction 
of Constitution, 66. 
At the Bar. — Dartmouth College 
Case. Attains leadership of New 
Hampshire bar, 66 ; moves to Bos- 
ton, 67 ; tries cases before United 
States Supreme Court, 67 ; cast 
down by death of daughter, 68 ; 
summary of career to this point, 
68, 69 ; alleged attempts to snub, in 
Boston, 70 ; at once acquires popu- 
larity, and leadership at bar, 70 ; 
rapid intellectual growth, 71 ; re- 
tained by Wheelock in behalf of 
Dartmouth College, 74; does not 
appear in Wheelock's case before 
committee of legislature, 75; led 
by Federalist leanings to join cause 
of trustees against Wheelock, 75 ; 
counsels trustees to soothe Demo- 
cratic opponents, 76; angered by 
Bartlett'B attacks, 77 ; his first ar- 
gument for College against State, 
78 ; does not press constitutional 
point, 79 ; rejects appeal on consti- 
tutional point alone, 80 ; devises 
cases to raise other points, 80; 
makes his argument at Washington 
mainly on other than constitutional 
points, 80; after argument still 
urges the other cases, 80, 81 ; ad- 
mits ability of adverse decision by 
New Hampshire court, 81 ; secures 



counsel of Hopkinson before United 
States Supreme Court, 81 ; in his 
argument adds little to materiaJ 
furnished by Smith and Mason, 82 ; 
gives due credit to them, 82, 83 ; 
inadequacy of i>rinted report of bin 
argument, 83, ^4 ; introduces out- 
side matters to i>€r«uade, 84 ; aims 
to stir political syinpathieH of Mar- 
shall, 85 ; pictures degradation of 
Federalist college by Democrats, 85 ; 
in peroration appeals to emotions, 
86 ; moved by his own eloquence in 
describing the college, 87 ; descripv- 
tion of scene, 87, 88 ; success of his 
appeal, 88, 89 ; his argument alters 
Story's view, 90 ; does not hope a 
favorable decision, 91 ; mythical 
story of his relations with Pinkney, 
92 n. ; moves final judgment, 94 ; er- 
roneous popular idea of his share in 
case, 94 ; gains his success by oratory 
and strategy, 95 ; sliows talent* at 
their best iu this case, 95 ; prepares 
argument in Gibbons r. Otjden in 
one night, 96 ; strength of his argu- 
ment, 96 ; comparison of hi« meth- 
ods with those of Marshall and 
Hamilton, 97 ; his argument in Og- 
den V. Saunders, 97 ; other cas^s 
argued by him, 97 ; in Girard will 
case realizes law is against him, 98 ; 
appeals to prejudice by a defense 
of Christianity as attacked by Gi- 
rard's will, 98 ; his imagination im- 
pressed by church history, 99 ; 
speech inferior to earli.>r ones, V9 ; 
lacks deep religious feeling, 100 ; 
believes but does not feel his words, 
100 ; a defender of establinhed idea* 
only, 101 ; his argument in the 
Dorr case, 101 ; public Intertnit in 
his speeches on purely legal pcinU, 

101, 102; anecdote showing hi* abil- 
ity to see the viUl point in a caae, 

102, 103 ; prefers to let others do 
his 'seeking for him. 103 ; his power 
of assimilation. 104 . in early yr*r« 
gives credit to hel|>orH, HM ; Ut*^ 
ceases to admit obligstiona, 104; 
aided by Story. 10». la". ; rrfnwis to 
allow publication of Story'* irttrrs 
to him, 106 i not an original thinker. 



370 



INDEX 



105 ; his indolence, 105 ; hia legal 
ability estiuiated, 10() ; elected to 
state conbtitutional convention, 107. 

Jn Massachusetts Constitutional 
Canvention. Plays a leading part, 
108 ; leads conservative party, K'f^ ; 
favors abolition of religious test for 
holding oflBce, lO'J ; argues i)urely 
on grounds of expediency, lO'J ; 
avoids taking strong ground, 110; 
Kjieecli un biisis of representation, 
llO-H'i; urges different origin for 
ujjper house, 110; advocates pro- 
perty representation, 110-112; on 
advantages of equality of property, 
111 ; ingeniousness of his argument, 
IIJ ; carries his point, 112; aims to 
protect judiciary from legislature, 
113; gains great reputation, 113; 
praised by Story for parliamentary 
ability, 113, 114. 

The Orator. — The Plymouth Ora- 
tion. Overwhelming effect of his 
Plymouth oration described by Tick- 
nor, 114, 115; his fitness for occa- 
sional oratory, IIG ; not embar- 
rassed by freedom, 117 ; character 
and delivery of speech, 117 ; ap- 
peals to the aesthetic emotions, 118; 
gratified at popular enthusiasm, 
118 ; his happiness described. 111) ; 
praised by John Adams, IIH, 120; 
his Bunker Hill oration, 120, 121 ; 
superior to Plymouth oration in fin- 
ish, 120 ; touches highest point of 
occasional oratory, 121 ; his eulogy 
on Adams and Jefferson, 122, 123 ; 
his imaginary speech of John Ad- 
ams, 122 ; supposed to be quoting 
an actual speech, 123 ; in oration at 
Mechanics' Institute avoids dangers 
of omniscience, 123 ; other orations, 
123, 124 ; his oration on Washing- 
ton, 124 ; sadness in his oration on 
addition to the Capitol, 124. 

Member of Congress. Elected in 
1822 from Boston, 125 ; urges 
Monroe's Nortliern visit, 125; en- 
tertains Calhoun, 125, 12G ; leads 
remnants of Federalist faction, 127 ; 
placed at head of judiciary com- 
mittee, 127 ; twice reelected with- 
out opposition, 127 ; his influential 



position in House, 127 ; speech in 
favor of appointing a commissioner 
to Greece, 128-130 ; neglects oppor- 
tunity for rhetorical or classical 
display, 12S ; his first advocacy of 
American Union, 128, Vl'J , reviews 
principles of Holy Alliance, 124, 
13tl; appeals to America to protest 
again.st thon by expressing sympa- 
thy with Greece, 130 ; does not press 
re.solutiun, 130 ; increases his fame 
as a ii;ition:il statesman, 131 ; takes 
part in routine work, 131 ; speaks 
against tariff of 1824, 131 ; defeats 
attempts to curtail power of Su- 
preme Court, 132 ; advocates inter- 
nal improvements as national ad- 
vantage, 133 ; gains popularity in 
the West, 133 ; carries " Crimes 
Act " tlirougli Congress, 1133, 134 ; 
aided by Story in codifying crim- 
inal law, 134; introduces bill in- 
creasing number of supreme judges, 
134; carries bill through House, 
1:35; not depressed by defeat in 
Senate, 1.35 ; supports Adams's ad- 
ministration, 135, 13(3 ; discusses 
Panama Congress and Monroe doc- 
trine, 13G, 137 ; fails to carry a 
bankrupt law, 137 ; attacked for 
threatening Georgia in Creek case, 
137 ; his forcible reply defying Geor- 
gia, 138 ; his zeal for Union in- 
creases, 138, 13'J ; considered for 
seat in Senate, 139 ; urged by ad- 
ministration to remain in House, 
139 ; urges senatorship upon Lin- 
coln, 139 ; reluctantly accepts posi- 
tion, 140 ; favors Calhoun at first in 
1823, 140; prevented by Federalist 
prejudices from supporting Adams, 
140, 141 ; slight personal relations 
with Adams, 141 ; not clear why he 
opposed Clay, 141 ; considers Craw- 
ford as possible leader, 142 ; on 
committee to investigate charges 
against Crawford, 142 ; denounced 
by Adams for trying to protect 
Crawford, 142, 143 ; avows inten- 
tion not to take active part in elec- 
tion, 143 ; slow to support Adams 
when election is thrown into House, 
143 ; endeavors to secure recogni- 



INDEX 



371 



tion from Adams of Federalists, 
144 ; efforts of Adams to couciliate, 
144 ; dissuaded by Adams from being 
candidate for speakership, 144 ; af- 
ter election as administration leader 
on good terms with Adams, 145 ; 
always ronhidered morally unsound 
by Adams, 145 ; considers his ser- 
vices not properly api)reciated, 145; 
in accepting senatorship feels he 
has sacriticed enough for Adams, 
145, 14G; grows cool towards Ad- 
ams, 14(i ; inactive in 1828, 14(J ; in- 
different to Adams's defeat, 14G; 
without intending to, becomes mem- 
ber of Whig party, 14(5 ; contiimes 
labors at bar and in Supreme Court, 
147 ; visits Jefferson, 147 ; forms 
acquaintance of traveling English- 
man, 147 ; impressed by Niagara, 
147 ; reaches highest point in eu- 
logy on Adams and Jefferson, 148 ; 
moved by his own speeches, 148 ; 
death of his wife, 141t; crushed in 
health and spirits, 149, 150. 
/n United States Senate. In spite 
of affliction, makes masterly speech 
on entering Senate, 151 ; saves bill 
for relief of Revolutionary oflBcers, 
152; in speech on tariff of 1828 
abandons previous position, 152 ; re- 
view of his earlier views, 153-lGl ; 
holds Federalist views on protec- 
tion, 15:5 ; in 1814 objects to artificial 
stimulus of manufactures, 154 ; ob- 
jects to manufacturing as inferior 
to agriculture, 154, 155: advocates 
freedom of occupation and develop- 
ment, 155 ; in 1810 succeeds in re- 
ducing duties, 155, 150 ; in 1820 
speaks at public meeting in favor of 
free trade, 156 ; doubts constitu- 
tionality of protection, 15G ; con- 
siders incidental protection possi- 
ble, 157 ; asserts it to be a failure 
in England, 157 ; declares protec- 
tion a tax and unjust, 158 ; opposes 
manufactures as undes^irablc, 158 ; 
makes elaborate speech against tar- 
iff of 1824, 159-101 ; its ability and 
economic insight, 159 ; advocates 
free commerce, KK) ; condemns un- 
steadiness of policy, 160, 101 ; in 



IS28 votes for tariff of abotiiinntiono, 
IGl ; changes his position 6<|uarply, 
IGl ; describes reasons for ciiange, 
102, lli;5; follows change in New 
England due to results of previou* 
tariffs, IGTi ; (juestion of Imh inron- 
histency, 104 ; probably cuiitinuei 
to believe in free trade as a theory, 
104 ; always considered protection 
a matter of expediency, 105 . hav- 
ing opposed tariff as inexpedient, ho 
changes wlien it bcconies a fixed 
policy, 1C5; obliged to shift consti- 
tutional ground, 105, lOG ; reniaino 
the champion of Clay's " American 
System," 100 ; his course sectional 
but unavoidable, 166; denounces 
Jackson's removals from office, 107 ; 
holds that only public sentiment can 
cure spoils system, 167 ; rej.lies to 
Hayne's attack on New England. 
108; again attacked by Hayn«> per- 
sonally, 109 ; his " reply to Hayne," 
169-180 ; reaches zenith of his ca- 
reer witli this speech, 109; admits 
right of revolution, 170; his argu- 
ment against nullification shows it 
as practical revolution, 170 ; de- 
monstrates absurdity of constitu- 
tional nullification, 171 ; argues 
against facts in holding Constitution 
to have been national in 1789, 171, 
172 ; defines national union as ex- 
isting in 1830, 174 ; real signiflrancp 
of his speech is its spirit toward 
Union, 174, 175; discuswlon of 
speech as specimen of orator) , 
176-180 ; excitement in S«»nate, 170 ; 
description of his exordium. 177, 
17s ; his delivery ami its effect, 178 ; 
ground covered in spe»;ch, 179 ; va- 
ries character of oratory, 179 : uim»« 
irony, 179, 180 ; the speech typical 
of )iis best qualities, 180; mudrni 
in oratory but with classic trAit-, 
181, 182; resembles Demoptln i > >, 
182 ; does not seem to have studied 
ancient models, 182 ; h.n."* iinajjin.'x- 
tion, but not fancy, lNr>; Kpanng 
in description, 183; his good tajitr, 
1S^ ; simplicity ot bin i<fvle, K?; 
and language, IM ; dinlike of Ijttiit 
derivatives, 184 ; his speeches read 



372 



INDEX 



woU, 18."; equally able in prepared 
or exteruporaneoua speech, 185 ; 
calls his whole life a preparation 
for the reply to Hayne, 185 ; elabo- 
rate mental preparation, 185 ; im- 
portance of his personal presence, 
18G ; although of moderate size, ap- 
pears a giant, 18G; his brain, face, 
180; his eyes and voice, 187 ; power 
of his look, 187, 18S ; anecdotes of 
effect produced by his appearance, 
188, 189 ; his control over an audi- 
ence, 189, 190 ; impassive appear- 
ance when not in action, 190 ; his 
indolence, 190 ; needs direct stimu- 
lus to make him exert himself, 190 ; 
anecdote showing his awaking from 
sluggishness, 191 ; carries dull 
speeches through by his manner, 
191 ; his argument in the White 
murder case, 192-194 ; his defense 
of Prescott, 192 ; power of cross- 
examination in Goodridge case, 192 ; 
his oratory in the White case, 193 ; 
surpasses Burke's best efforts, 193, 
194; appalling effect of his exor- 
dium, 194 ; commands rather than 
persuades a jury, 194 ; unrivaled 
in American history, 195 ; compared 
with English orators, 196 ; inferior as 
a jury lawyer to Erskine and Choate, 
1% ; compared with Burke, 197 ; 
inferior in imagination, superior in 
taste, 197, 198 ; final summary of 
his oratorical power, 198, 199 ; one 
of the five greatest orators in his- 
tory, 199 ; saddened by loss of his 
brother Ezekiel, 200; marries sec- 
ond wife, 200 ; a turning-point in 
his career, 200 ; effect of his speech 
in the North, 201 ; gains fame and be- 
comes presidential candidate, 202 ; 
wishes to solidify Whig party on a 
platform, 202 ; regreta anti-Masonic 
schism, 202 ; dislikes Clay's nomi- 
nation, 202 : realizes his own nomi- 
nation is out of question, 202 ; ad- 
vocates renewal of Bank charter, 
203 ; opposes proposition to allow 
States to tax the Bank, 203 ; refutes 
Jackson's position, 204 ; opposes 
Van Buren's nomination as minis- 
ter to England, 205 ; rebukes Van 



Buren's instructions to MacLane, 
20G; takes small part in debates 
over tariff of 1832, 20G ; predicts 
danger from nullifiers, 206 ; opposed 
to Clay's compromise tariff, 208 ; 
wishes first to assert national su- 
premacy, 208 ; announces intention 
to support Force Bill, 209 ; intro- 
duces resolutions against tariff of 
1833, 210 ; replies to Calhoun, 210 ; 
unable to meet Calhoun on histori- 
cal ground, 210, 211 ; ability and elo- 
quence of his argument, 212 ; oi>- 
poses compromise tariff on its pas- 
sage, 213; Benton's praise of, at 
this juncture, 214, 215 ; thinks he 
made a mistake in not joining Jack- 
son, 214, 215; held by Benton to 
have shown weakness, 215 ; real im- 
possibility of his supporting Jack- 
son, 215 ; yet this was no less his 
crisis, 216 ; should have remained 
nationalist leader, 216 ; probable 
success of his policy if carried out, 

217 ; feels pressure of manufactur- 
ers and comes over to Clay's side, 

218 ; led by presidential ambition, 
21 S ; makes tour in Western States, 
218 ; nominated by Massachusetts, 
218 ; has no real hold on West, 219 ; 
receives electoral vote of Massachu- 
setts only, 219; unable to realize 
the impossibility of his attaining 
presidency, 219, 220; his career 
embittered by this ambition, 220; 
his decided opinion in favor of 
Bank, 220 ; presents resolutions 
against removal of deposits and 
describes distress, 221 ; his active 
campaign, 222 ; remarkable series 
of financial and constitutional 
speeches, 222 ; replies to Jackson's 
protest, 223 ; secures defeat of For- 
tification Bill in order to prevent 
Jackson bringing on a French war, 
224 ; speech on appointment to 
oflQces, 225 ; asserts power of Sen- 
ate to share in removals, 225 ; in- 
troduces bill but fails to carry it, 
225, 226; moves to lay expunging 
resolutions on table, 226 ; defends 
conduct toward Fortification Bill, 
227 ; tries to avert evil effects of 



INDEX 



373 



BurpluB, 227 ; speech on Specie Cir- 
cular, 227 ; speech against expun- 
ging resolutions, 228 ; determines to 
resign from Senate, 228 ; possibly 
thinks retirement useful to presi- 
dentiiil candidacy, 229 ; persuaded 
to remain, 229 ; second tour in West, 
229 ; speech against sub-treasury, 
230 ; speech on reception of notes 
of solvent banks by government, 
230 ; visits England, 230 ; his recep- 
tion, 231 ; fails to attain presiden- 
tial nomination in 1839, 231 ; takes 
part in log-cabin campaign, 231 ; his 
Niblo's Garden speech on Jackson, 
232 ; his exertions in 1840, 232, 233 ; 
his success as a stump speaker, 233 ; 
appointed secretary of state by 
Harrison, 234. 
Secretary of State. Amends Har- 
rison's inaugural, 238 ; his intro- 
duction of foreign ministers to Har- 
rison described, 239, 240 ; his pol- 
icy in McLeod case, 242 ; unable 
to secure McLeod "s release, 243 ; 
tries to allay excitement against 
Tyler, 244 ; determines not to sacri- 
fice foreign negotiations to party 
politics, 244, 245 ; with approval of 
Massachusetts, announces intention 
of remaining in cabinet, 245 ; action 
creditable on his part, 245; aided 
by change in British ministry, 245 ; 
offers to agree upon a conventional 
boundary, 246 ; negotiations with 
Ashburton, 246-249; hampered by 
Creole case, 247 ; secures appoint- 
ment of commissioners by Maine, 
247 ; agrees with Ashburton on mu- 
tual concessions, 247, 248 ; proposes 
that United States indemnify Maine 
and Massachusetts, 248 ; persuades 
both state commissioners and Ash- 
burton, 248 ; disposes of slave trade, 
248 ; and of Caroline case, 249 ; un- 
able to settle Creole case, 249 ; his 
letter on impressment, 240 ; suc- 
cessful character of negotiations, 
249, 250; aided by Story. 250; his 
diplomatic skill, 250 ; demand of 
Whigs that he resign, 250 ; attacked 
by South for sacrificing its inter- 
ests, 250 ; determines to hold office 



until treaty is secure, 251 ; clamor 
in Massaclnisetts to force liim out 
of cabinet, 251 ; his upeerh nt Fan- 
euil Hall refusing to be driven, 251, 
252 ; writes letter on right of search, 
253 ; correspondence with Caim, 
253; dealings with Portugal, 'ITA; 
vindicates course of United States 
to Mexico, 253 ; directs policy of 
government toward Rhotle InUud, 
264; tries to settle Oregon bound- 
ary, 254 ; establishes Chinese mis- 
sion, 254 ; resigns, 2."»4 ; his success 
as secretary of state, 264. 

In Retirement. His estate at 
Marshfield, 254 ; resumes practice 
with success, 255 ; aloof from poli- 
tics, 255 ; refuses to oppose Clay's 
candidacy in 1844, 255 ; alarmed at 
rise of Liberty party, 255 ; sustains 
Clay in campaign, 255 ; speaka 
chiefly on tariff, 255; declines re- 
election to Senate, 256 ; returns to 
Senate in 1845, 256; favors forty- 
ninth parallel for Oregon boundary, 
257 ; speaks in Faneuil Hall agaiiut 
a war for Oregon, 258 ; suggest* 
that England offer forty-ninth par- 
allel, 259. 

In Senate. Opposes belligerent 
resolutions on Oregon, 259 ; value 
of his action in preventing war, 
259; bitterly attacked by Ingers«'Il 
for friendliness to England and for 
corruption, 260 ; said to have threat- 
ened New York in McLeo<l caae, 
260; his defense, 260, 2t".l ; <lf- 
Dounces IngersoU and Dickiuaou, 
261 ; resolutions against, iiitro<iiired 
by IngersoU, 261 ; overwhfliiiinjfly 
vindicated by Senate, 262; arcuned by 
IngersoU of using money to corrupt 
the press, 262 ; proved to havo br^n 
careless but honest, 262 ; does not 
vote on Mexican war, 2C>3; opp<<«»r« 
volunteer system, 263 ; op(x>««a war 
and acquisition of territory. 2l3 ; 
tour in South, 263 ; loiws ton iu 
war, 2t'.3 ; his arctiniint ag.^inst con- 
quest of new territory, 204 ; K»«'« 
daughter, 264 ; emt.itterrd by Tay- 
lor's successful randida*-y. 2C«5 ; rt^ 
fuses offer of vice-presidency, 266; 



374 



INDEX 



resents action of his friends in sup- 
porting Taylor, 2G5 ; predicts nomi- 
nation of Clay, 2GG ; despairs of 
Whig party, 266 ; refuses to join 
Free Soilers, 266 ; refuses to sup- 
port Taylor, 266 ; in his Marshfield 
speech prefers Taylor's nomination, 
although "not tit to be made," to 
that of Cass, 267 ; review of his at- 
titude on slavery, 267-2S7 ; in 1819 
draws up memorial advocating ex- 
clusion of slavery from Missouri, 
268, 269 ; condemns slavery, 269 ; 
in Plymouth oration denounces 
slave trade, 269, 270 ; inconsistency 
of later positions with these utter- 
ances, 27U, 271 ; does not touch 
upon slavery question in Panama 
Congress, 271 ; in reply to Hayne, 
disclaims intention to attack slav- 
ery, 271, 272 ; considers it out of 
reach of interference, 272 ; yet an 
evil, 272, 273 ; votes against rejec- 
tion of abolition petition, 273 ; pre- 
sents petitions and advocates refer- 
ence to a committee, 273 ; asserts 
power of government over slavery 
in the District, 273 ; defends right 
of petition, 273 ; votes against Cal- 
houn's bill to exclude anti-slavery 
documents from mail, 274 ; at 
Niblo's Garden opposes annexation 
of Texas and extension of slavery, 
275, 276 ; on impossibility of sup- 
pressing anti-slavery sentiments, 
275, 276 ; declines in Senate to dis- 
cuss merits of petitions, 276 ; op- 
poses Clay's anti-abolition resolu- 
tions, 277 ; declines to commit him- 
self on slavery, 277 ; accused by 
Adams of trying to placate South, 
278; similar charge of Giddings 
against, 278 ; does not vote on Cal- 
houn's resolutions on Enterprise 
case, 279 ; his letter in Creole case, 
279 ; its contrast to Plymouth ora- 
tion, 279 ; alarmed at organization 
of Liberty party, 280 ; alarmed at 
prospect of annexation of Texas, 280; 
agitates against Texas, 280 ; fails to 
go far enough personally to inspire 
confidence, 281 ; on entering Senate 
states grounds of objections to 



Texas, 281, 282 ; opposes mildly the 
admission of Texas as a State, 282 ; 
takes small part in war measures, 
283 ; introduces resolutions against 
acquisition of territory, 283 ; de- 
novmces Morthern Democrats for 
their annexation policy, 283, 284; 
weakness of his policy, 284; votes 
for Wiluiot Proviso, 284 ; in 1847 
upholds Wilmot Proviso as his own 
invention in 1837,284,285; speaks 
against Tlii Regiment Bill, 285; 
speech on Objects of Mexican war, 
285 ; opposes new territory and 
plan of cutting up Texas, 286 ; speaks 
on slavery in territories, 286 ; takes 
full Free Soil position, 286, 287 ; his 
chance to leave Whigs in 1848, 287 ; 
concurs in Buffalo platform, but 
rejects Van Buren, 287 ; denies that 
Taylor was nominated by South, 
287 ; his opportunity for fame, 288 ; 
refuses to change party, so is 
obliged to change ideas, 288 ; tries 
to push aside slavery for old Whig 
measures, 288 ; introduces resolu- 
tions to continue military govern- 
ment and Mexican law in new ter- 
ritories, 289 ; gets the better of 
Calhoun in debate as to status 
of Constitution in territories, 290; 
approves Clay's compromise, 292 ; 
delivers 7th of March speech, 292- 
294; a worthy literary effort, 293; 
reviews history of slavery, 293 ; op- 
poses Wilmot Proviso as unnecessary 
and a taimt to South, 293 ; dwells 
on grievances of South, 293 ; con- 
demns refusal of North to carry 
out Fugitive Slave Law, 294 ; mini- 
mizes grievances of North, 294 ; de- 
nies peaceable secession, appeals for 
harmony, 294 ; his speech con- 
demned by general opinion of North, 
294, 295 ; from 1819 to 1830, a 
strong opponent of South and com- 
promise, 295; after that, a candi- 
date for presidency and moderate 
opponent of slavery, 296 ; his mild 
tone regarding slavery in speech, 
296 ; ignores slave trade in the 
District, 297 ; shocks North by up- 
holding Fugitive Slave Law, 297, 



INDKX 



:57.- 



298; his capital error in not oppos- 
ing slavery as a system, 'J'JS, 'J'.i'.i ; 
Ids incoubibtuucy vvitli earlit-r oi>- 
positiou to couipromise, 'J'J9, 3()0; 
liis course makes war inevitable, 
302 ; defended as Laving chosen be- 
tween compromise and secession, 
oO'J; error of tliis defense, odj ; not 
afraid of secession, 304, 303 ; writes 
letter expressing abhorrence of 
slavery but impotence to affect it, 
oOj ; his case not like that of Ke- 
publicaus in 18G0, 307 ; he does not, 
like them, oppose actual secession, 
but merely aims to end the danger, 
308 ; denies inconsistency in oppos- 
ing slavery extension, 309 ; weak- 
ness of argument as to Heedlessness 
of Wilmot Proviso, 310-312; his 
inconsistency proved, 312; leads 
Giddings to expect a strong anti- 
slavery speech, 313 ; probability of 
his having weighed botli sides, 313, 
314 ; his speech a powerful effort to 
arrest anti-slavery movement, 314 ; 
damaging effect of his speech on 
movement in New England, 31;") ; 
aids conservative reaction, 315 ; his 
failure to produce any lasting im- 
pression, 315, 31G ; angers Northern 
anti-slavery men by complimenting 
Calhoun and South, 31('), 317 ; real- 
izes in his own conscience his mis- 
take, 317 ; makes vigorous efforts 
in behalf of the compromise, 318 ; 
changed tone of his speeches, 318; 
denounces Free Soilers and Aboli- 
tionists together, 318; calls anti- 
slavery a ghostly abstraction, 318 ; 
denounces anti-slavery men as in- 
Bane, 319 ; defends Fugitive Slave 
Law, 319 ; advises in case against 
fugitives, 319 ; calls Wilmot Proviso 
a mere abstraction, 320 ; appeals to 
South to maintain Union, 320 ; harsh 
and bitter tone of language, 320 ; 
his lack of peace of mind, 320. 321 ; 
question of his motives fur speech, 
321-323; not wholly controlled by 
presidential ambition, 321 ; desires 
to save Union, 322 ; errs by joining 
what he supposes the stronger side, 
322 ; ready to resist secession at 



last event, 322 ; but prefers to pro 
vent it by concession, 322. 

Scoctiirij iij atitte. Appointed hy 
Fillmore, 324 ; chararter of term, 
324 ; rebukes Austria in Hiilsemann 
letter, 325; wishes to arouw na- 
tional pride, 32.">, OJC ; tactful con- 
duet toward Kossuth, 32f. ; repliea 
coolly to Hidsemann'H protect, :v_'G ; 
negotiates witli Bulwer over Nica- 
ragua canal, ;;27 ; other niattent, 
327 ; prevents war uitli Sjiain, 327 , 
later dispatches, 32.S ; remains sole 
statesman in Whig party, 328; 
movement to make him candidate, 
328; hopes for nomination, 328, 
329; receives slight sujiport, 3211; 
expects support from Fillmore del- 
egates, 329 ; abandoned by South- 
ern Whigs, 33<^) ; bitterly disap- 
pointed by loss of nomination, 330; 
advises friends to vote for Pierce, 
331 ; his cond\ict indefensible. 331 ; 
and inconsistent with his beliavior 
in 1S48, 332 ; his principles now 
asserted l>y Whigs, 333 ; commits a 
breach of faith, 333; nicrea*ing ill- 
health, SXi, 334; melancholy. ?A\ , 
thrown from carriage. 334 ; dis- 
suaded by Fillmore from resigning, 
334; returns to Marshfield, 334; 
last days and death, :i3r> ; funeral, 
33u. 

Personal Characlerislics. Hi» 
comment on his career, 33<'> ; his 
last years overclouded with f^looin, 
337 ; his real success not to be orer- 
shadowed, 337, 33S ; leader o( l»*r 
and of Senate, 338 ; his gifta for 
leadership, 33S ; his coiwervative 
intelligence, 3."^' ; dignity, •oleu.- 
nity, 339 ; indolence, 340 ; neceasity 
of being stimulated, 340; tAct in 
every-day affairs, 3U> ; a prneticAl 
statesman not in advance of hi* 
times, 340, 341 ; abtioncc of warmth 
in his naturi'. 341 ; hi« i»en»«' of 
humor, 311, 'M'2 . ak:reeab:eni')«» in 
society, 342 ; no scholar, but wrll 
informed, 343 ; love of nature and 
outdoor sports, 343 ; liking for 
largeness and Rtrongth, 'M3, 344. 
affectionatenesfl, hi* friends, M4 ; 



376 



INDEX 



grows dictatorial in later life, 345 ; 
not popular with masses, 345 ; ad- 
mired but not loved, 345 ; slight 
distrust of his sincerity, 346; his 
weakness in money matters, 346- 
350 ; his extravagance, 347 ; re- 
ceives gifts of money, 347, 348 ; 
compelled to explain away attacks, 

349, 350 ; his lack of moral convic- 
tions, 350 ; stands in American his- 
tory for nationalism as against sec- 
tionalism, 351 ; continually alludes 
to it, 351, 352; his influence upon 
thought of North, 352 ; other refer- 
ences, his absence of malice, 59 
acceptance of friends' sacrifices, 14 

15, 24, 105 ; affectionateness, 11, 12 
14, 15, 32, 68, 87, 159, 200, 281, 344 
ambition, 20, 27, 30 ; bitterness in 
later years, 318, 320, 334, 336-338 
345 ; carelessness in money matters 
32, 260, 202, 346-351 ; conscience 
uneasiness of, in last years, 317 
320; conservatism, 42, 109, 339 
consistency, 165, 293, 312, 313 
322, 323 ; dignity, 70, 238, 316, 335 
339; diplomatic ability, 248, 249 
250, 254; education, 9-23; finan 
cial insight, 222, 232 ; generosity 
23, 25, 32, 104; humor, 25, 199 
238, 330, ^41, 342 ; ingratitude, 104 
105; leadership, 56, 6S; legal abil 
ity, 31, 37, 39, 66, 78, 88, 95, 96-98 
101-103, 105, 106, 131, 192-194 ; lib 
erality, 42, 58 ; literary ability, 19 
20, 147 ; memory, 10, 16, 17, 55 
mental powers, 17, 55, 185, 339 
moral force, lack of, 322, 332, 340 

350, 351 ; nature, love of, 343 ; ori 
ginality, lack of, 21, 38, 82, 102, 
104-106 ; oratorical ability, 10, 11 

18, 19, 21, 22, 26, 34, 39, 43, 44, 50 
54-56, 82, 85-87, 95, 99, 101, 102 
114-134, 148, 169, 177-186, 193-199 
232, 233, 293 ; personal appearance 

19, 25, 26, 27, 33, 119, 136, 148, 177 
186-192, 338; parliamentary abil 
ity, 114, 151, 166; play, love of, 11 
12, 13, 18 ; popularity, lack of 
345; reading habits, 9, 11, 13, 15, 

16, 26, 343 ; religious views, 41, 48- 
101, 109, 335; sarcasm, 180, 261 
scholarship, 16, 17, 343 ; slowness of 



growth, 54 ; sluggishness, 39, 95, 
190, 340, 343; social qualities, 36, 

40, 59, 70, 71, 342 ; solemnity, 339 ; 
susceptibility to advice, 30, 47, 218 ; 
teaching ability, 25 ; will, weak- 
ness of, 215, 216, 278, 288. 

Political Opinions. Abolitionists, 
277, 314, 318, 320 ; Ashburton 
treaty, 246-249, 261 ; bank, 60, 61, 
63, 64, 203, 204, 220-222, 227, 244 ; 
church and state, 109 ; compro- 
mises, 208, 213, 210, 217, 299, 300, 
306, 308 ; compromise of 1850, 292, 
305, 308, 317, 318; compromise 
tariff, 208, 210, 213 ; conscription, 
59; Constitution, 94, 95, 96, 98, 
171, 210-213, 290; Constitution of 
Massachusetts, 109-113 ; Creeks, 
138; Creole case, 248, 249; cur- 
rency, 61, 63, W, 65, 221, 227, 230; 
Dartmouth College case, 78-96; 
Democratic party, 233 ; disunion, 
56, 58, 293, 304, 305; election of 
1824, 141-144 ; embargo, 43, 44, 52, 
53; executive, powers of, 167, 223, 
225 ; expunging resolutions, 228 ; 
extradition, 249 ; Federalist party, 

41, 42, 43, 47, 56, 57, 123, 129; 
Force Bill, 209 ; France, 43, 46, 48, 
52 ; Free Soil party, 266, 287, 313 ; 
Fugitive Slave Law, 294-298, 319 ; 
Gibbons v. Ogden, 90 ; Holy Alli- 
ance, 129-131; impressment, 249; 
internal improvements, 60, 133 ; 
judiciary, 112, 113, 132, 134, 135; 
Liberty party, 255 ; mails, Calhoun's 
exclusion bill, 274 ; manufactures, 
154, 158; Mexican war, 263, 283; 
Missouri, admission of, 267-269; 
national spirit, 22, 54, 129, 131, 
137, 174, 201, 216, 351 ; navy, 44, 
49, 50 ; new territories, acquisition 
of, 264, 282, 286, 289, 290 ; nullifi- 
cation, 170 ; Ogden v. Saunders, 
97 ; Ordinance of 1787, 272 ; Oregon, 
257, 258, 259 ; party loyalty, 49, 56, 
58, 141, 252. 331-333; petition, 
right of, 273, 276 ; presidential am- 
bition, 202, 218, 220, 229, 231, 255, 
265, 277, 296, 321, 328-330, 337; 
property representation, 110-112; 
protection, 53, 152-166 ; revolution* 
right of, 170, 223, 225, 226 ; search 



INDEX 



377 



right of, 253 ; slavery, 2C0-273, 275, 
286, 288, 293, 295, 296, 299, 305, 314, 
318 ; Specie Circular, 227 ; spoils 
system, 167 ; sub-treasury, 230 ; ter- 
ritories, power of Congress in, 2G8, 
287 ; Texas, 255, 264, 274-276, 280, 
281, 282, 286; treaty power, 136; 
Union, 58, 129, 138, 139, 171, 172- 
175, 319, 322 ; vice-presideucy, 265 ; 
war of 1812, 44-46, 50, 51, 57; 
Whig party, 202, 244, 252, 255, 266, 
280, 287, 331 ; Wilmot Proviso, 284, 
285, 293, 309, 312, 318, 320. 

Webster, Ebenezer, birth and early 
years, 5; service with Rogers's 
Rangers, 5 ; settles in Salisbury, 6 ; 
character and personality, 6; his 
second marriage, 7 ; raises a com- 
pany and marches to Boston in 
1775, 7 ; consulted by Washington 
at Dorchester, 7 ; bravery at Ben- 
nington, 7 ; trusted at West Point 
after Arnold's treason, 7 ; becomes 
judge, 7, 11 ; his strength of will 
and character, 8 ; his children, 8 ; 
determines to give his son an edu- 
cation, 11 ; takes Daniel to Exeter, 
11; takes him to Dr. Wood, 12; 
surprised at proposal to give Ezekiel 
an education, 23; hia self-sacrifice, 
24, 30 ; accepts Daniel's decision to 
decline clerkship, 30 ; dies, 31 ; his 
intolerant Federalism, 41. 

Webster, Major Edward, dies, 263. 

Webster, Ezekiel, anecdote showing 
his generosity toward his brother, 
14 ; his friendship with Daniel, 23 ; 
helped to gain an education, 23-25 ; 
teaches school in Boston, helps Dan- 
iel to study in Boston, 27 ; admitted 
to bar, succeeds to his brother's 
business, 31 ; shuts himself off from 
political preferment by narrow 
opinions, 42 ; death, 200. 

Webster, Grace, her illness detains 
her father from Congress, 03 ; last 
illness and death, 67, 68. 

Webster, Thomas, Bcttles in New- 
Hampshire, 5 ; his ancestry and de- 
scendants, 5. 

West, popularity of Webster in, after 
speech on internal improvements, 
133 ; attempt of Hayne to prejudice 



against New England, 1C8; touri 
of Webster in, 218, 229; failure 
of Webster to gain popularity in, 
219. 

WhamclifFe, Lord, travels In Amer- 
ica, 147. 

Wlieelock, Eleazer, founds Dartmonth 
College, 73; bis controversy *ith 
Bellamy, 73 ; provides for Burre»- 
sion of his son in presidency, 73. 

Wheelock, John, president of Dart- 
mouth College, 18 ; succeedi hia 
father, 73 ; his struggle with NIIm 
for control of Dartmouth, 73 ; con- 
sults Webster, 74 ; sends memcriAl 
against trustees to legislature, 74 ; 
abandoned by Webster, 74, 75 ; re- 
moved by trustees, 76 ; appeals to 
Democrats, 76 ; suggests constitu- 
tional point in Dartmouth College 
case, 79. 

Whig party, begins in Adams's ad- 
ministration, 135, 146 ; Web«ter in- 
evitably led to join, 146 ; desire of 
Webster to solidify, 202 ; damaged 
by anti-Masons, 202 ; defeated in 
1832, 202; takes shape in bank 
struggle, 203, 204, 223; adopU 
Clay's compromise policy instead of 
Webster's courageous one, 216-218 ; 
distracted condition in 1836, 229; 
failure of Webster to secure sup- 
port of, 219, 231 ; nominates Harri- 
son in 1839,231 ; its campaign, 2:U- 
233 ; its breach with Tyler. 244 ; 
condemns Webster for remaining In 
Tyler's cabinet, 245, 251 ; nomi- 
nates Clay, 255 ; campaign of, 256 ; 
defeated by Liberty party, 2.'«5 ; 
movement in, to nominate T.^ylor, 
265; nominates Taylor over CUy. 
266 ; elects Taylor. 2C7 ; thiuka 
Webster's alarm over Trxa* unne- 
cessary, '-'SO ; without prinripira in 
1850, 307 ; movement in, to nomi- 
nate Webster, 3*28 ; nomln»t*a Scott 
at national convention. IfJO ; »i»- 
proves roinpromiiw. ^'J'.i ; Southern 
ii\pmber9 of, prefer Killmor» to 
Clay, 329, 330 ; »b*ndon«»<l by Web- 
ster in campaign, 331 ; more coo- 
sistent In 1852 than In 1848. 333, 
333. 



378 



INDEX 



Wilinot, David, introduces his Pro- 
viso, '282. 

Wilmot Proviso, introduced, 283 ; ad- 
vocated by Webster as a Whig mea- 
sure, 284, 285; in 1850 declared 
unnecessary by Webster, 309, 310 ; 
discussion of his view, 310-312. 

Wirt, William, in Dartmouth College 
case, his insufficient preparation, 
81, 82, 89 ; on bad terms with Piuk- 



ney, 92 ; objects to motion to enter 

judgment, 94. 
Wood, Dr., studies of Webster with, 

12. 
Woodward, Judge, turned out by 

trustees of Dartmouth, 70 ; suit of 

trustees against, 77 ; death, 93. 

Yancey, W. L., accuses Webster of 
being iu pay of manufacturers, 348. 



